ES2017 async / await functions with Gulp
See original GitHub issueEnv: Gulp 4 Node 7.6.0
Can I use ES2017 async functions with Gulp?
function delay(ms) {
return new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(resolve, ms));
}
gulp.task('sumo', async () => {
await delay(3000);
return "success"
});
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 6 years ago
- Comments:12 (6 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Async Await + Gulp - unable to minify JavaScript?
Had similar issue with gulp-uglify, and as I've found out it seems that minifying async/await is not supported with base gulp-uglify , so...
Read more >Async Completion - gulp.js
When a stream, promise, event emitter, child process, or observable is returned from a task, the success or error informs gulp whether to...
Read more >Complete Guide to JS Async & Await ES2017/ES8 - YouTube
Learn about the fancy new async and await keywords in JavaScript. ... asynchronous code with a callbacks to instead use async functions.
Read more >Compiling ES6 with Gulp and Babel
How can we use Gulp to compile our ES6 and beyond into browser-compliant ES5. ... and exciting methods available to you in modern...
Read more >Understanding JavaScript's async await - Ponyfoo
When Async Functions finally hit the road, we'll be able to take our Promise -based implementation and have it take advantage of the...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
This thread promotes a lot of old patterns that we don’t suggest anymore (registering with strings vs using named functions, etc) so don’t follow anything here. We’re working on updated docs that explain async/await usage in more detail.
@Evertcolombia what you wrote is completely incorrect.