TomaszStanisz
commented
5 years ago Hi Brian,
Sorry for delay but I was busy and later I just forgot to answer 😊 I also didn’t check you second brunch before my changes (now I checked), but I still think that subscription with Task option and Publish which return Task can be useful.
The reasons why I add this task base methods is because:
- I already have methods which returns tasks and I want to subscribe with this methods. I know that I can create another void method and call Task.Run inside but it is more comfortable to have dedicated method.
-
When you have both versions for publish (which return void or Task) and both version for subscribe (action and function with Task) then you can use it in all scenarios which you need:
- Publish and do not wait for any subscriber (doesn’t matter if it is subscribed with action or task). You can just call PublishAsync without await
- Publish and wait for all subscribers (doesn’t matter if it is subscribed with action or task). You can just call await PublishAsync.
- Publish and wait for all subscribers subscribed with actions and don’t wait for subscribers subscribed with tasks. You can just call Publish.
- Subscribe with action or with Task (depends from your needs) Br Tomasz
Od: Brian notifications@github.com Wysłano: 26 March 2019 22:04 Do: upta/pubsub pubsub@noreply.github.com DW: Tomasz Stanisz tomasz.stanisz@novacura.com; Author author@noreply.github.com Temat: Re: [upta/pubsub] Add SubscribeTask, PublishAsync (#20)
Curious, what would the benefits be over simply switching it to be Task-based like I did in my async-test branch?
https://github.com/upta/pubsub/tree/async-test
I originally went down the path of doing separate [Method]Async calls, but since the whole goal of the library is to keep things simple I was wary of doing so and didn't see a benefit.
I could be wrong and there is one, of course :) I'm just not seeing it.
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/upta/pubsub/pull/20#issuecomment-476851893, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMerD0Xz7HzMwcg9b7Ic0JkPn60x-_2Jks5vaotRgaJpZM4btZj0.
fabricioferreira
upta
Curious, what would the benefits be over simply switching it to be Task-based like I did in my async-test branch?
https://github.com/upta/pubsub/tree/async-test
I originally went down the path of doing separate [Method]Async calls, but since the whole goal of the library is to keep things simple I was wary of doing so and didn't see a benefit.
I could be wrong and there is one, of course :) I'm just not seeing it.