Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:128856
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMW7n8DGbFnQzjt3s9CcOBwhp+MUOV+K3U=yY=ULOTdUXaOLHQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <bcd8253c-04f3-4046-b51f-2e387e215f6d@app.fastmail.com> <CAMW7n8BfP7h5rpDrjigu0oWK4Z+aRaqGjgzEFS_mDXRhq19vQQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <2b9fd3ec-50ca-41e4-985a-274f886df8b3@app.fastmail.com> <CAMW7n8C5GD+F2KdCZTtZwFbc2rk_4yGgdiak8fs9y5Z3UU_zxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <2e39e211-c816-41db-a079-f2c6b3934e0a@app.fastmail.com> <CAKXKfQtO+yoFB1=6zonwgGRpx1YExBNSkcjpso51aJ59YzaDLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <436d4ede-c08e-4e7d-9ae2-8342f7f827ed@app.fastmail.com> <CAMW7n8CdXxYZ9=zwZdt0rohMALkNhQwCcwnJPnnmxVjVc42iWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <e3f5c8bc-48de-4294-9a86-291661e12b39@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e3f5c8bc-48de-4294-9a86-291661e12b39@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 18:46:13 +0300
Message-ID: <CAMW7n8C1u8YUa2R5z+O6qxYH5V-9FuKMJZH2TBp0L+A6Um3wEg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] PHP True Async RFC Stage 4
To: Rob Landers <rob@bottled.codes>
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: edmond.ht@gmail.com (Edmond Dantes)

> That contradiction encourages people to wrap it to =E2=80=9Cmake it await=
able,=E2=80=9D which re-introduces the very problem you=E2=80=99re trying t=
o avoid.

Hm...

> Renaming it to something like joinAll() or joinAfterCancellation() keeps =
the semantics intact while communicating the intent: this isn=E2=80=99t a f=
uture; it=E2=80=99s a container join.
> That small change would make the interface self-documenting and harder to=
 misuse.

There=E2=80=99s also an issue with the method name.
The `awaitCompletion` method waits not for the Scope to close, but for
all tasks to complete. That=E2=80=99s not the same thing.
Maybe `joinAll` really is better, since it resembles the way threads
are expected to work?
But does `joinAll` fully reflect the meaning? After all, it=E2=80=99s not
about waiting for *all* tasks in general, but only for those that
exist while the function is active. That=E2=80=99s a very important
distinction. Because in addition to this function, there could also be
something like `awaitFinally` or similar.

> That's what we are here to do, no? Discussion is useful if it makes thing=
s better than the sum of their parts.

Typically, when developers start medium or large projects, they begin
with the key components intentionally leaving out details that can be
easily changed later.
There=E2=80=99s definitely something to discuss here, but is it really wort=
h
doing it *right now*? :)

> // Looks innocent, but this can wait on foreign work:
> $scope->awaitCompletion(Async\timeout(60000)); // rename -> joinAll(...)?

If the developer wanted to start a task and limit its execution time,
the code looks fine.
And I would add a `try/catch` to handle errors.

> My point is that it wasn't listed in "future scope" of the RFC, though th=
ey're mentioned throughout the document, in passing.
Yes, that was done intentionally on the advice of the PHP Team.