Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Waterfall without nextTick() #152

Closed
manuelcabral opened this issue Jul 26, 2012 · 3 comments
Closed

Waterfall without nextTick() #152

manuelcabral opened this issue Jul 26, 2012 · 3 comments

Comments

@manuelcabral
Copy link

One of reasons I use async.js is to avoid long nesting of function calls.

Recently, I had the need to remove the nextTick() call from waterfall. The reason for this was that one function was getting some input from the user which required clicking a "Submit" button , and the next one was attempting to login on Facebook. The Facebook login pop-up was getting blocked by Safari, since nextTick() make the blocker consider that the pop-up was not appearing in response to a user action (the click on the Submit button).

I've fixed the problem by simply removing the nextTick call, but if more people are interested, I can implement a more elegant solution. What would be the best way to do this? A new syncWaterfall() function? A third parameter being passed to waterfall() and series()?

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Sep 16, 2012

+1. syncWaterfall

@mlogan
Copy link

mlogan commented Dec 20, 2012

I got bitten by this, and would be interested in a fix. There's no reason to defer any processing in waterfall to a subsequent tick, and its quite confusing given that async.series doesn't use nextTick.

@statico
Copy link

statico commented Dec 20, 2012

+1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants