4 ms·
For dead-simple parallel execution of a handful of jobs, IMO nothing beats mapping data to tasks with Linq and then "await Task.WhenAll". And if they have to sh
by m_fayer 10y ago
For dead-simple parallel execution of a handful of jobs, IMO nothing beats mapping data to tasks with Linq and then "await Task.WhenAll". And if they have to share data, use something in System.Collections.Concurrent.
- emn13 10y agoFor fun bits of API inconsistency there, would you think that... "task.Wait()" is to "await task" as "Task.WaitAll(tasks)" is to "await Task.WhenAll(tasks)"? Maybe it's just me, but I sure did.
- bonzini 10y agoWhenAll returns a task (a promise, essentially) that completes "when all" its arguments have completed.
- emn13 10y agoI seem to have misremembered, the odd one out was WhenAny, and the issue is that it crashes when given the empty set, instead of waiting forever (which is fine if you're dealing with a specific number of tasks, but not fine if you're actually using it for a dynamic number of tasks). I could have sworn it was WaitAll, but heck - clearly not! Sorry :-).