Re: PHP True Async RFC Stage 4

> Would it be better to instead of having ->awaitCompletion (which feels like an implicit > implementation of Awaitable without an explicit implmentation -- which is the part that was > bothering me), maybe having something like ->joinAll() or ->joinOnCancellation()? > That way someone like me won't come along and wrap them in an Awaitable because it looks > Awaitable. For example, you have an interface DataBaseAdmin with a removeDB() method and a class that implements it. You need to be able to delete the database, but with an additional condition. So you create a decorator class with a method ContextualDBAdmin::removeDBWhen($extraRules). As a result, the decorator class is logically associated with the DataBaseAdmin interface. The question is: **so what?** > It also might be a good idea to make specifying a timeout in ms mandatory, instead of a taking > an Awaitable/Cancellation. The idea is correct, but there will definitely be someone who says they need more flexibility. And it's true you can create a DeferredCancellation and forget to finish it. :) There are a lot of such subtle points, and they can be discussed endlessly. But I wouldn’t spend time on them. > It also might be good to provide a realistic looking example showing a "bad case" of > how this is dangerous instead of simply saying that it is, showing how a scope is not a > 'future', > but a container, and preemptively mention TaskGroups, linking to the future scope (which it > should also probably be listed there as well). 1. It’s very difficult to write a realistic example that’s still small. 2. The TaskGroup or CoroutineGroup class is left for future discussion. In the final documentation, it will be exactly as you suggested.