[RFC] Consider deprecating FulfilledPromise and RejectedPromise (mark as internal only) #155
Description
What purpose does the FulfilledPromise and RejectedPromise have? It's my understanding these should be used internally only and using the resolve() and reject() functions is the preferred alternative (or in many cases simply omit it).
For instance, here's some example code that highlights how using these classes is often unneeded:
fetch($url)->then(function ($response) {
if ($response->getStatusCode() !== 200) {
return new RejectedPromise(new RuntimeException());
}
return new FulfilledPromise($response);
});The following code solves the exact same use case without any explicit references to these classes:
fetch($url)->then(function ($response) {
if ($response->getStatusCode() !== 200) {
throw new RuntimeException();
}
return $response;
});Likewise, the following lines also have the same effect:
$promise = new FulfilledPromise($value);
$promise = resolve($value);$promise = new RejectedPromise($reason);
$promise = reject($reason);Do we have valid use cases where it makes sense to expose these classes? I'd love to see some input on this.
If we can't come up with valid use cases, I would suggest deprecating both classes for v2.x and removing them in v3.0 from our public API (which might mean marking them as @internal only). This way, we can reduce our API surface and are more in line with other promise implementations (e.g. ES6 promises). This simplifies our documentation and helps steering people to recommended usage patterns.
What do you think?