On Friday, 8 October 2021 at 10:19:40 UTC, ikod wrote:
> On Friday, 8 October 2021 at 06:38:17 UTC, bauss wrote:
>> On Thursday, 7 October 2021 at 23:20:15 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 7 October 2021 at 22:35:23 UTC, russhy wrote:
>>>> I don't think trying to replicate C# async/await is a good idea, it promotes creating bad APIs (GetThisAsync | GetThisAsync.ButSyncThisTimeToGetResult)
>
>>
>> Ex.
>>
>> DownloadFile() would be synchronous, whereas DownloadFileAsync() would then be async.
>
> This is not always useful to have different names for interfaces, especially when application developer decide for some performance/scalability/etc reason to port sync code to async environment.
>
> DownloadFile can be implemented such that it detects if it work in sync or async environment like (in pseudocode):
>
>
> void DownloadFile() {
>     if (activeEventLoopDetected) {
>         wait asyncCode
>     } else {
>         call syncCode
>     }
> }
>
>>
>> That avoids the whole problem of calling an async method synchronous, because in general you shouldn't ever do that anyway!

I'm not saying it's the best way to do it. I'm just stating that's the standard way in C#.