juan_gandhi | scala futures critique

Decided to reread this:

http://docs.scala-lang.org/overviews/core/futures.html

"The most general form of registering a callback is by using the onComplete method, which takes a callback function of type Try[T] => U"

Guys, do you seriously think accepting a monad is a good solution? What is the type of your function? Well, it's a comonad, but I wonder if they know that.

"The callback is applied to the value of type Success[T] if the future completes successfully, or to a value of type Failure[T] otherwise."

Ever heard of XHR? They just have two functions, onsuccess and onerror. If you have a union, it's better to define a function on components.

Actually, they have it all. onSuccess, onFailure.

"The onComplete, onSuccess, and onFailure methods have result type Unit, which means invocations of these methods cannot be chained."

Oh. It's all so... not exactly wrong, but so misrepresented...

"This can be mind-boggling, but fortunately the flatMap operation is seldom used outside for-comprehensions, which are easier to use and understand."

Interesting. Which century was it?

"The recover combinator creates a new future which holds the same result as the original future if it completed successfully."

"The recoverWith combinator creates a new future which holds the same result as the original future if it completed successfully."

"The recoverWith combinator creates a new future which holds the same result as the original future if it completed successfully."

What a life!

"The andThen combinator is used purely for side-effecting purposes. It returns a new future with exactly the same result as the current future, regardless of whether the current future failed or not."

"we create a promise and use its future method to obtain the Future that it completes"

I remember reading it with almost an awe.
Now it all looks funny, like Ulysses - but Ulysses is actually funny, while this one is basically just a little bit sick. Is it not?