QQ.step can accept array of funtions

[veged]

If first argument of QQ.step is Array (or not Function) it was be useful use it instead all arguments.
Now I should write QQ.step.apply(Q, [ f1, f2 ]) instead of QQ.step([ f1, f2 ]).

Also Q.all can opposite accept multiply arguments in conjunction with Array: Q.all([ ... ]) ~ Q.all(..., ..., ...).

[kriskowal]

I am pretty adamant about not mixing variadic and array signatures because of the ambiguity of a single array argument. I shy in general from variadic functions because it’s such a pain to spread an array into arguments. Could I interest you in this shorthand instead?

[f1, f2].reduce(Q.when, Q.resolve())

[veged]

But in case of QQ.step there is no ambiguity with a single array argument, because all arguments must be functions.

If you so adamant about such polymorphism for functions, maybe you can add another function for this purposes (arrStep or something)? [f1, f2].reduce(Q.when, Q.resolve()) not so shorthand even in comparison with QQ.step.apply(Q, [ f1, f2 ]).

[kriskowal]

@veged Good point about the brevity of the shorthand.

I would entertain changing the signature of QQ.step to accept an array instead of variadic arguments in a future backward-incompatible version. I might even remove Q.deep which would mean that each function would have to return a promise. There was an earlier problem where an object that contains a buffer would seriously slow the system down, since Q.deep would check every byte for a promise. It is probably better not to use Q.deep at all in hindsight.

All thoughts welcome. This library belongs to the people using it and I have very little agenda for it.