Apologies again, I'm a beat or three behind today. I think you gave the 
example already:

   expr1.flatMap(x =>
     expr2(x).flatMap(y =>  ...
       exprN(x, y, ...).map(z =>
         result(x, y, ..., z)
       )
     )
   )

Nice when Scala and JS look alike!

I don't think we'd make comprehensions return a monad, specifically a 
Promise, even if we had the silly things (Promises, I mean -- just 
teasing about monads) in the language.

JS is eager and mutational. Although Mark and I have discussed privately 
trying to get E-like "featureless" promises, which become their 
fulfillment value, we think it's too big a stretch. Especially in light 
of existing libraries, but even starting fresh.

Without E-like featureless/"becoming" promises, I wouldn't foist them on 
syntax for eager computations such as comprehensions and generator 
expressions.

So is the explicit functional style, with arrows for sugar, really too much?

/be

Brendan Eich wrote:
> Brendan Eich wrote:
>> Mike Stay wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Brendan Eich<brendan at mozilla.com>  
>>> wrote:
>>>> What's wrong with the iteration protocol?
>>>
>>> Nothing at all for arrays.  For every other monad, there's no sugar:
>>> the only monad multiplication that's supported is list concatenation.
>>
>> Iteration is much more general than "arrays".
>
>
> Oh, sorry -- you mean comprehensions (not the iteration protocol, 
> which is used by all for-of syntax) are only about creating fresh arrays.
>
> Yes, that's true. One alternative is a generator expression, which 
> doesn't build any eager data structure, rather iterates and yields 
> values on demand.
>
> As Jason pointed out, arrows sweeten the explicit monadic patterns, 
> e.g. monadic Promises. To close this thread it would be helpful to see 
> an example where you use all the ES6 sugar, and then say why you'd 
> still want another special form.
>
> /be
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>

Apologies again, I'm a beat or three behind today. I think you gave the 
example already:

```scala
expr1.flatMap(x =>
  expr2(x).flatMap(y =>  ...
    exprN(x, y, ...).map(z =>
      result(x, y, ..., z)
    )
  )
)
```

Nice when Scala and JS look alike!

I don't think we'd make comprehensions return a monad, specifically a 
Promise, even if we had the silly things (Promises, I mean -- just 
teasing about monads) in the language.

JS is eager and mutational. Although Mark and I have discussed privately 
trying to get E-like "featureless" promises, which become their 
fulfillment value, we think it's too big a stretch. Especially in light 
of existing libraries, but even starting fresh.

Without E-like featureless/"becoming" promises, I wouldn't foist them on 
syntax for eager computations such as comprehensions and generator 
expressions.

So is the explicit functional style, with arrows for sugar, really too much?