3 ms·
GP is not wrong, then: with this implementation, async/await still amounts to the good old cooperative multitasking and does not (yet?) take advantage of thread
by Koshkin 7y ago
GP is not wrong, then: with this implementation, async/await still amounts to the good old cooperative multitasking and does not (yet?) take advantage of threads. (In C#, for example, async/await is indeed different from this, being based on TAP - Task-based Asynchronous Pattern, where tasks are executed "asynchronously on a thread pool thread rather than synchronously on the main application thread.")
- steveklabnik 7y agoAsync/await lets you build tasks, but is completely orthogonal to threads. You could set up tasks with a 1:1 or N:M or even single threaded model. And yes, the GP is not wrong that if this were the only mechanism provided, it would be similar. It does not seem like the plan is to expose this externally whatsoever, though.