> On Sep 3, 2017, at 4:00 AM, David Hart <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Please don’t read too much into the beginAsync API. It is merely a >> strawman, and intended to be a low-level API that higher level abstractions >> (like a decent futures API) can be built on top of. I think it is important >> to have some sort of primitive low-level API that is independent of higher >> level abstractions like Futures. >> >> This is all a way of saying “yes, having something like you propose makes >> sense” but that it should be part of the Futures API, which is outside the >> scope of the async/await proposal. > > But it would be nice for all high-level APIs that conform to a Awaitable > protocol to be used with await without having to reach for a get property or > something similar everytime.
The futures API that is outlined in the proposal is just an example, it isn’t a concrete pitch for a specific API. There are a bunch of improvements that can (and should) be made to it, it is just that a futures API should be the subject of a follow-on proposal to the basic async/await mechanics. -Chris
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
