This version uses Mainloop.timeout_add() instead of setTimeout() for older GNOME versions (<42)

Ok, but why don't you use `GLib.timeout_add()` and `GLib.Source.remove(timeoutId)` instead? and you should remove the timeout on disable: https://gjs.guide/extensions/review-guidelines/review-guidelines.html#remove-main-loop-sources

Ok, when I use `timeoutId = GLib.timeout_add(GLib.PRIORITY_DEFAULT, milliseconds, () => { resolve(); });` everytime the user refreshes the menu in less than 1 secs it's creating a new timeout source and overwriting timeoutId with it. On disable we can remove the last timeout source but previous ones stays untouched. So I think I should also remove the timeout right after the Promise which covers it gets resolved. But when I do that everything seems ok but it logs an error: "Source ID 9366 was not found when attempting to remove it". If I add `return GLib.SOURCE_REMOVE;`in the callback function it acts the same. Only If I do `return GLib.SOURCE_CONTINUE;` like in the example you sent, it doesn't error. But it feels awkward to use `return GLib.SOURCE_CONTINUE;` for a timeout we will only use once and remove immediately. Doesn't using `return GLib.SOURCE_REMOVE;` inside callback function already remove the timeout source? What would be the best approach in this situation?

https://docs.gtk.org/glib/const.SOURCE_REMOVE.html

Because when you want to remove the timeout id in disable, you should do: ```js if (timeoutId) { GLib.Source.remove(timeoutId); } ``` Inside the callback you should null out the timeoutId: ```js timeoutId = GLib.timeout_add(GLib.PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 1000, () => { timeoutId = null; return GLib.SOURCE_REMOVE; }); ``` The reason we want you to do that is that the timeout can get delayed, so they can get triggered after disable.