Re: Async'ing a library

Here's a really late reply to a really old thread re making a library async by simply wrapping "plain" calls with Task.Run. Yes, Richter describes nicely how you shouldn't block in worker threads doing I/O as you "pollute the pool". The trouble is, sometimes you don't know what a library is doing

Re: Async'ing a library

On 8 December 2015 at 11:12, Greg Keogh wrote: > Here's a really late reply to a really old thread re making a library async > by simply wrapping "plain" calls with Task.Run. Yes, Richter describes > nicely how you shouldn't block in worker threads doing I/O as you "pollute >

Re: Async'ing a library

Greg, On 28 March 2015 at 15:17, Greg Keogh wrote: > Folks, I have an existing library with lots of traditional non-async methods > in it, and I want to provide async versions of the old methods. Would you > consider this to be a simple and trustworthy way of getting this done? >

Async'ing a library

Folks, I have an existing library with lots of traditional non-async methods in it, and I want to provide async versions of the old methods. Would you consider this to be a simple and trustworthy way of getting this done? public Thing GetThing(int key) { // This is the existing method return

Re: Async'ing a library

Yeah, generally speaking, if you think you understand something, you must have it wrong. Also, as soon as you comprehend something, someone will change it. Just assume you have no idea and be done with it. Run with it until someone complains about it. :) On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Greg