HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
stefanpenner
es6-promise
JavaScript2016–2017
stefanpenner / es6-promise

es6-promise

A polyfill for ES6-style Promises

2Distinct people
3Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
7.2KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A polyfill for ES6-style Promises

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by week3 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2016-08-05 18:34:18 UTC to 2017-01-26 06:02:32 UTC. Weeks start Monday, UTC.

012016-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-08-08 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsAug 12016-08-08 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-08-15 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-08-15 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-08-22 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-08-22 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-08-29 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-08-29 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-09-05 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-09-05 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-09-12 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-09-12 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-09-19 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-09-19 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-09-26 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-09-26 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-10-03 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-10-03 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-10-10 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-10-10 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-10-17 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-10-17 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-10-24 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2016-10-24 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-10-31 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsOct 242016-10-31 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-11-07 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-11-07 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-11-14 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-11-14 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-11-21 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-11-21 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-11-28 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-11-28 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-12-05 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-12-05 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-12-12 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-12-12 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-12-19 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-12-19 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-12-26 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-12-26 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-02 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-01-02 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-09 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-01-09 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-16 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-01-16 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-23 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-01-23 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-30 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsJan 23

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Aug 12016-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-08-08 00:00:00 UTC101
Aug 82016-08-08 00:00:00 UTC2016-08-15 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 152016-08-15 00:00:00 UTC2016-08-22 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 222016-08-22 00:00:00 UTC2016-08-29 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 292016-08-29 00:00:00 UTC2016-09-05 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 52016-09-05 00:00:00 UTC2016-09-12 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 122016-09-12 00:00:00 UTC2016-09-19 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 192016-09-19 00:00:00 UTC2016-09-26 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 262016-09-26 00:00:00 UTC2016-10-03 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 32016-10-03 00:00:00 UTC2016-10-10 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 102016-10-10 00:00:00 UTC2016-10-17 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 172016-10-17 00:00:00 UTC2016-10-24 00:00:00 UTC101
Oct 242016-10-24 00:00:00 UTC2016-10-31 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 312016-10-31 00:00:00 UTC2016-11-07 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 72016-11-07 00:00:00 UTC2016-11-14 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 142016-11-14 00:00:00 UTC2016-11-21 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 212016-11-21 00:00:00 UTC2016-11-28 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 282016-11-28 00:00:00 UTC2016-12-05 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 52016-12-05 00:00:00 UTC2016-12-12 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 122016-12-12 00:00:00 UTC2016-12-19 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 192016-12-19 00:00:00 UTC2016-12-26 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 262016-12-26 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-02 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 22017-01-02 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-09 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 92017-01-09 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-16 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 162017-01-16 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-23 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 232017-01-23 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-30 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

3 sources
I disagree. A developer choosing to not handle the 'error' param in an error-first callback at all is incompetence from a node dev, akin to writing 'try-except-pass' in Python, whereas silent swallowing of runtime exceptions is a bug of the runtime and inexcusable. Btw, I prefer Promises and the error-bubbling approach in principle for the reasons you're getting at, but the current implementations (especially in p0lyfills like es6-promise) are simply broken, due to the standards themselves being lacking. See this comment for fact the fix has been in draft for a while now: https://github.com/stefanpenner/es6-promise/issues/70#issuec...
In Node v6.9.0 (LTS)
Unfortunately Promises need to be fixed before fetch will be sane and here's how the promises spec currently looks: - unhandled errors silently swallowed [1] (this is the case for the most popular polyfill [1] too - the one recommended by fetch polyfills, BEWARE [3]) - no 'finally' method, despite pretty much everything in a UI needing some common 'cleanup' after e.g. a fetch() - not cancellable Right now you're better off with `$.ajax` (maybe make a custom build of jQuery) or a promise-like library like reqwest [2], rather than fighting with fetch. [1] https://github.com/stefanpenner/es6-promise/issues/70#issuec... [2] https://github.com/ded/reqwest [3] http://requirebin.com/?gist=8f13d5147c1c252ab1691115bfa8b7c5
In JQuery++

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.