From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE305B9645 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 10:08:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8DFAE9434 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 10:08:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 10:08:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0BC9346FC9 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 10:08:08 +0100 (CET) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 10:08:07 +0100 Message-Id: From: "Gabriel Goller" To: "Dominik Csapak" , "Proxmox Backup Server development discussion" X-Mailer: aerc 0.17.0-37-g3aa8b6308482-dirty References: <20240313161801.132483-1-g.goller@proxmox.com> <2524761d-e6b9-4d89-84ef-03d261029f92@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <2524761d-e6b9-4d89-84ef-03d261029f92@proxmox.com> X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.091 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 1/2] gui: remove document.execCommand calls X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 09:08:42 -0000 On Thu Mar 14, 2024 at 8:59 AM CET, Dominik Csapak wrote: > hi, > > just to note: changing to an async function can be rather dangerous, > sometimes extjs not only calls the handlers/events/etc. but does things > after them (expecting the function to be finished) or waits for the retur= n value. Hmm, but does it actually **await** the return value? I'm not a ext.js expert but I don't think it is. Anyways it's fine because js promises are executed eagerly + promise returned directly. > (most of the extjs code was from before async/await was a thing in js) > > so here it seems to work out fine, but we have to be careful with > sprinkling async function in the code, otherwise we'll get > very unexpected results > > in general, i'd like to see that mentioned in the commit message > why it's ok to do that (no hard feelings though) > > otherwise LGTM What do you think about adding this to the commit message: Making the handler functions async is not a problem, because promises in js are executed eagerly (not lazily) and nothing depends/waits on the result of this handler.