In this article I will describe how the ES2017
promises, both of which were added earlier to the language in the ES2016 specification.
asyncfunctions can be realised using
asyncfunctions are better or worse than the other approach.
async functions are now natively supported, what is the need to understand how they work?
Well, apart from the obvious reason of curiosity, an important reason is supporting older platforms. If you want your code using these newer features to run on older browser versions or older Node.js versions, you would be required to use tools like Babel to transform these newer features into older features.
Therefore, a solid understanding of how
async functions get decomposed into
promises can come in handy when reading/debugging your transformed code. For example, here is a simple example of an
async function :
This function gets transformed by Babel into the following ES2016 code (don’t worry about understanding it right now, we will cover it later) :
They look really different! However, if you understand how
async functions actually work, then this transformation is fairly obvious.
Another fun fact, browsers also implement
async functions in a similar fashion i.e. they transform the
async code to use
promises quite similar to Babel.
Sometimes in order to understand how something works, the best way is to build it yourself. So let’s flip the question:
Imagine we are given a piece of code that uses
asyncfunctions, how can we rewrite it using only
async function :
It performs three asynchronous tasks, one after the other where each task depends on the completion of the previous task. Finally, it returns the result of the last task.
Generators are functions which can be exited and later re-entered. Let’s quickly recap how they work. Here’s a simple generator function :
gen has some interesting aspects (lifted from the MDN docs) :
genis by calling the
nextmethod on its iterator-object. Every time the
nextmethod is called, its body is executed until the next
yieldexpression. The value of this expression is returned from the iterator.
nextmethod also accepts an argument. Calling it with an argument replaces the current
yieldexpression with the argument and resumes the execution till the next
yield-by-yield(i.e. one yield-expression at a time), by its iterator (the
yieldhas a give → halt → take behaviour, so to say.
nextmethod is called again.
nextmethod is called again, it takes the argument from it and replaces the currently halted yield-expression with it. It then moves to the next
You may want to read the above summary again or refer to the amazing MDN docs!
By now you would be wondering, how do the generator functions help our situation? We need to model an asynchronous flow where we have to wait for certain tasks to finish before proceeding ahead. But so far in our discussion everything has been synchronous. How can we do that?
Well, the most important insight here is that the generator-functions can yield
generator function can
promise (for example an async task), and its iterator can be controlled to halt for this
promise to resolve (or reject), and then proceed with the resolved (or rejected) value. This pattern of weaving a an iterator with yielded
promises allows us to model our requirement like this :
(Notice how this generator function resembles our
But this is only half the story. Now we need a way to execute its body. We need a function that can control the iterator of this
generator function to halt every time a
promise is yielded and proceeds once it resolves (or rejects). It sounds complicated, but is very simple to implement, as shown below :
Now we can execute our
init using this
runner function as shown below:
And that’s it! This combination of a
runner function and our
generator function achieves a similar outcome as the original
Please note that this
runner function is only for demonstrating the concept. It is not suitable for any serious use. If you are looking for a proper implementation, you can find it here.
We started with an
async function and then we wrote an identical implementation using
promises. That is, the following two pieces of code will have a similar effect :
asynccode to ES2016 code using
promises. You can now revisit that transformed code and compare how our
runnerfunction is similar to the
_asyncToGeneratorfunction. In fact, that
_asyncToGeneratorfunction is the foolproof version of our extremely simple
asyncfunctions to ES2015 code i.e. without
generators. For this you would have to emulate
generatorsthemselves (using a stateful busy loop with
switchcases for e.g. see the regenerator project).
I hope this explanation clears up the mystery behind
async functions. They offer a simpler syntax and therefore less code noise. The proposal for
async functions states that :
The introduction of Promises and Generators in ECMAScript presents an opportunity to dramatically improve the language-level model for writing asynchronous code in ECMAScript.