@jenninat0r
, It might just be a typo, but I think you meant async/await syntax vs. promises which use then/catch syntax to chain operations (with .catch(cb) being used for error handling). Not try/catch.
In the case of async/await, you'd just use normal try/catch syntax around your await calls for error handling.
Both are used to accomplish the same thing, so I'd say which one you use is a matter of preference. Promises are very similar to monads (although technically they don't quite qualify as such), and I suspect that promises were developed to kind of support a functional style of programming (everything stays in the context of a promise). On the other hand, async/await is designed to make the code look like ordinary imperative code, only asynchronous.
I could be wrong, but I would say whichever one is easier for a team to work with is the one they should use.
@jenninat0r , It might just be a typo, but I think you meant async/await syntax vs. promises which use then/catch syntax to chain operations (with
.catch(cb)being used for error handling). Not try/catch.In the case of async/await, you'd just use normal try/catch syntax around your
awaitcalls for error handling.Both are used to accomplish the same thing, so I'd say which one you use is a matter of preference. Promises are very similar to monads (although technically they don't quite qualify as such), and I suspect that promises were developed to kind of support a functional style of programming (everything stays in the context of a promise). On the other hand, async/await is designed to make the code look like ordinary imperative code, only asynchronous.
I could be wrong, but I would say whichever one is easier for a team to work with is the one they should use.
Yes it was a brain fart. I’m in the ‘then/catch’ camp !