q-connection

I will speak mostly to Q, since I am a co-maintainer. Q has historically stemmed from the work of Mark Miller, one of the authors of the E programming language, from which JavaScript promises are largely inspired. As such, it aligns with his larger goals for a promise ecosystem, which include object-capability security and using promises as proxies for remote objects. For an example of promises applied in these contexts, see his paper at [1]. In practice, all of this is somewhat theoretical, as Q also serves a large constituency of "normal" promise users in Node and the browser. There, it differentiates itself via a focus on features and integrity over speed (mainly as a matter of prioritization; we like speed too!); excellent Node.js integration [2]; and an internal system which allows promises for remote objects via Q-Connection [3] (bu

Does this support sticky sessions? Normally I think it's best for HTTP backends to be stateless, but WebSockets open up interesting possibilities for RPC solutions like NowJS (https://github.com/Flotype/now), dnode (https://github.com/substack/dnode), and others (https://github.com/kriskowal/q-connection) that benefit from keeping state in memory in the app servers. I'd be interested to hear about other load balancing techniques for WebSockets.

Promises make a handy wrapper for any kind of value-in-the-future, be that the mundane case of invoking non-blocking functions with callbacks, in the case of getting values from remote remote systems (https://github.com/kriskowal/q-connection), and, I dare say, if we had coroutines, they'd make a great first-class object for pulling result values out of them too. A promise is agnostic to your concern. Thanks for writing.