{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maxogden/concat-stream/issues/26","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maxogden/concat-stream/issues/26/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maxogden/concat-stream/issues/26/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maxogden/concat-stream/issues/26/events","html_url":"https://github.com/maxogden/concat-stream/pull/26","id":32664836,"number":26,"title":"Add support for async through transforms","user":{"login":"jden","id":1106489,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1106489?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jden","html_url":"https://github.com/jden","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jden/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jden/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jden/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jden/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jden/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jden/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jden/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jden/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jden/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":6,"created_at":"2014-05-02T03:07:07Z","updated_at":"2015-06-26T00:05:35Z","closed_at":"2015-06-25T16:59:12Z","pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maxogden/concat-stream/pulls/26","html_url":"https://github.com/maxogden/concat-stream/pull/26","diff_url":"https://github.com/maxogden/concat-stream/pull/26.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/maxogden/concat-stream/pull/26.patch"},"body":"I tried a few ways of implementing `through`-like transforms which first buffer the input stream, for use with standard node-style async functions. In the end, I wound up re-implementing almost all of `concat-stream` in these modules.\r\n\r\nIt seems like either through functionality should be a part of `concat-stream`, as is implemented in this speculative PR, or else there should be a better primitive for writing `concat-stream` like modules.\r\n\r\nThis syntax seems clean to me, and there should be negligible overhead for creating Duplex rather than Writable streams. If you're into this approach, feel free to merge - otherwise I'll probably just publish this as another module and revisit it later to factor it better.\r\n\r\n:cat2: "},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maxogden/concat-stream/issues/comments/115434823","html_url":"https://github.com/maxogden/concat-stream/pull/26#issuecomment-115434823","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/maxogden/concat-stream/issues/26","id":115434823,"user":{"login":"stevemao","id":6316590,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/6316590?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevemao","html_url":"https://github.com/stevemao","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevemao/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevemao/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevemao/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevemao/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevemao/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevemao/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevemao/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevemao/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevemao/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-06-26T00:05:35Z","updated_at":"2015-06-26T00:05:35Z","body":"@jden @maxogden I think making this as a duplex stream makes sense. I have valid use cases where I would concat all streams and pipe it down."}}