Thanks for this. When you write the "explainer" article for number 3, please contrast it with an old-school for loop. I'm interested to see if your opinion changes!
Hi, I just googled for it, and I was mindblown. Definitely will opt for that instead. I didn't know. 😁
This is why I love the comments section!
Edit: I just reread your comment, and 🤔 do you mean the new for await of that came with ES2018?
for await of
I did not mean for-await-of, I mean:
for (var i = 0; i < asyncFunctions.length; i++) { var result = await asyncFunctions[i](); console.log(result); }
Less code, less cognitive overhead!
jsfiddle.net/4umfreak/bkqcymuL/
Yeah, that's definitely a more readable approach. I have to be honest I haven't used for loops in a while so it didn't really occur to me.
@4umfreak updated the code to use plain ol' for-loops. Took me long enough.
Are you sure you want to hide this comment? It will become hidden in your post, but will still be visible via the comment's permalink.
Hide child comments as well
Confirm
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Thanks for this. When you write the "explainer" article for number 3, please contrast it with an old-school for loop. I'm interested to see if your opinion changes!
Hi, I just googled for it, and I was mindblown. Definitely will opt for that instead. I didn't know. 😁
This is why I love the comments section!
Edit: I just reread your comment, and 🤔 do you mean the new
for await of
that came with ES2018?I did not mean for-await-of, I mean:
Less code, less cognitive overhead!
jsfiddle.net/4umfreak/bkqcymuL/
Yeah, that's definitely a more readable approach. I have to be honest I haven't used for loops in a while so it didn't really occur to me.
@4umfreak updated the code to use plain ol' for-loops. Took me long enough.