I agree that async.js might be a bit heavy for the simple fact of doing series :)
But this library do a lot more and I had in mine to port this library to have something similar in Espruino, by also adding then the doWhile, etc etc with asynchronous management.... but you are right :)
Thanks for fixing the first two points.
Is the first point fixing the line :
° callback = callback || function () {};
° if (fn)
° if(arr.map)
But for me the for(.... in ... ) is also "wrong" ? In the code I'm ususally do it used to return the value (the item) and not the index (as an integer) in the array.
what I except is
for (var i in ["a","b","c"]) console.log(i)link
"a"
"b"
"c"
Is Espruino "standard" javascript ? or is it mine code that is not standard :) ?
I have to admit that I have worked more with node.js so I might be wrong in some of my comments
Espruino is a JavaScript interpreter for low-power Microcontrollers. This site is both a support community for Espruino and a place to share what you are working on.
I agree that async.js might be a bit heavy for the simple fact of doing series :)
But this library do a lot more and I had in mine to port this library to have something similar in Espruino, by also adding then the doWhile, etc etc with asynchronous management.... but you are right :)
Thanks for fixing the first two points.
Is the first point fixing the line :
° callback = callback || function () {};
° if (fn)
° if(arr.map)
But for me the for(.... in ... ) is also "wrong" ? In the code I'm ususally do it used to return the value (the item) and not the index (as an integer) in the array.
what I except is
Is Espruino "standard" javascript ? or is it mine code that is not standard :) ?
I have to admit that I have worked more with node.js so I might be wrong in some of my comments