support promises in object

[parisholley]

Allows you to send existing promises directly into the parallel call vs. wrapping in a function

[dbushong]

Two concerns:

1. this doesn't map to functionality in async.js's parallel() call
2. why would someone want this instead of just Q.all() ?

[parisholley]

@dbushong

1. I suppose if your goal is adhere to async.js API and not introduce the niceties of promises, sure, but it is a pretty harmless change.
2. I do not use Q, I just use native ES6 promises, so this library serves as a nice abstraction on top of native promises.

[dbushong]

If you have ES6 promises, you have Promise.all

If you really think this'll be useful, I'm fine with it; please update the READMEs also to mention the new functionality

[parisholley]

@dbushong Yes, but if I want to execute items in series, I have nothing :)

Readme updated

[dbushong]

simpler:
"An array or object containing promises or functions to...."

[dbushong]

LGTM; one suggested simplification - btw, FFR if you really don't want to use a lib and need to execute things in series you can use reduce:

promiseForSeries = [fn1, fn2, fn3].reduce(((p, fn) => p.then(fn)), Promise.resolve())

If you have a fixed number of them, it's even more readable to use async/await (if you're using babel+esnext) or something like bluebird coroutine + yield

[dbushong]

Don't forget to run make when you're done