Why not put it all in a package concurrency.structured then those that want the 
fully qualified names can basically do so, and those that don’t can use static 
imports. 

> On Mar 24, 2026, at 8:29 AM, Eric Kolotyluk <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I am fine with just "TaskScope" -  that's an improvement.
> 
> Cheers, Eric
> 
>> On 2026-03-24 12:24 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
>> I agree with Eric, STS name is too long.
>> 
>> Unlike Eric, Ì think that "TaskScope" is fine.
>> 
>> It's API uses the principles of structured concurrency, but it does not have 
>> to be in the name.
>> 
>> It's a scope for tasks (subtasks), so "TaskScope" seems good.
>> 
>> regards,
>> Rémi
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Eric Kolotyluk" <[email protected]>
>>> To: "loom-dev" <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2026 6:02:30 PM
>>> Subject: [External] : Re: Structured Concurrency to re-preview in JDK 27
>>> After taking the time to read the JEP, here is my two cents...
>>> 
>>> 1. Every revision of this seems to get better. I am glad it has been
>>>    incubating for so long before locking it down.
>>> 2. StructuredTaskScope seems like a long name and seems related to
>>>    ScopedValues
>>>      * Not that I mind long names
>>>      * But, when I sense a common pattern ('scope') it begs the
>>>        question as to the structure of names.
>>>      * I brought this up years ago before there were scoped values, so
>>>        it is still on my mind.
>>> 
>>> After playing around with Rust for a while, I find Project Loom
>>> concurrency to be much easier to understand and reason about, possibly
>>> because of such a long incubating process. Rust concurrency was
>>> developed too rapidly and needs its own retrospective.
>>> 
>>> Using Java concurrency since before the release of 1.0, I have burned
>>> myself many times, and learned many hard lesson. Structured Concurrency
>>> is simply the best thing that has ever happened to Java Concurrency,
>>> where I include the whole Loom results as well.
>>> 
>>> Having developed Akka/Scala code for many years, while it was elegant,
>>> it was hard to reason about with all the callbacks. Java
>>> CompletableFuture was not any better.
>>> 
>>> It is far easier, for me, to reason about 'tasks' than 'futures,' and to
>>> write imperative code than functional code.
>>> 
>>> Still, I look forward to Java tackling some of the other good ideas from
>>> Akka/Scala, such as Actors and Scala Streams, where Java ScopedValue is
>>> far better than Scala implicit.
>>> 
>>> On 2026-03-18 4:44 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>>> The plan for Structured Concurrency is to propose that it re-preview
>>>> in JDK 27 with some changes to improve the exception thrown by the
>>>> join method. It means adding an additional type parameter but it
>>>> doesn't impact the usability of any of the basic examples. We hope to
>>>> submit the draft JEP [1] soon.
>>>> 
>>>> -Alan
>>>> 
>>>> [1] https://openjdk.org/jeps/8373610

Reply via email to