posted by aL_

It seems like Async has a huge impact on the language spec, the languages is getting really complicated. no wonders many think we need languages designed with this in mind from the very beginning.

posted by felix9

C

posted by Charles

Erik (Meijer), Anders (Hejlsberg), Dijkstra, Lucian (Wischik)

Charles (Torre)

posted by AdamSpeight2008

posted by Charles

not to mention a whole lot fewer people would even know about anders, erik and the others if it wasnt for you and the rest of channel9

posted by aL_

Lucien also does pretty well at being able to speak to "us" through you+camera with you as a catalyst with questions.

Anders/Mads arent so fun to talk to recently since they are only about high level features, or a sneek peak into what is in the works which is ok but not my cup of tea, unless they gave funny corner-case code samples on the whiteboard. So personally I love the nitty-gritty details of this sort from who implemented and designed the compiler code rewriting/restructuring techniques just before code generation.

posted by HeavensRevenge

So what would it take to allow this style to be legal in vb.net (whilst preserving the vb.net style).

For example via an attribute. 

[Generics.CSharpStyle]
Public Function GetLength<T>(ByVal obj As T) As Integer
  Return obj.ToString.Length
End Function 

[Lambda.CSharpStyle]
Public Sub Example()
Dim x = (obj)=>obj.ToString.Length
End Sub

posted by AdamSpeight2008

I'm currently downloading the WMV version directly from the site, which I assume will work.

posted by dpratt71

C

posted by Charles

string[] urls = new[] {"htp://a.com", "htp://b.com"}
IAsyncEnumerable<string>[] values =
              async from url in urls
              select await new WebClient().DownloadStringTaskAsync(url);

Note: we're not planning to ship IAsyncEnumerable<T>. But you could easily write it yourself. It would involve the signature "async Task<bool> MoveNextAsync() {...}". Also we're not planning on "async linq". I wrote this example just as a strawman.

Anyway, this example is a bad use of async! Look what it would translate into:

values = urls.SelectAsync(async (url) => await wc.DownloadStringTaskAsync(url) );

which is identical to this more efficient version:

values = urls.Select( (url) => wc.DownloadStringTaskAsync(url) );

The "await" operator unwrapped the Task<string> that came out of DownloadStringTaskAsync into just a string, and then the "async" modifier morally wrapped it right back up into a Task<>.

Let's also be clear that async will always involve some overhead. It's nice to think of LINQ expressions operating over large sets of data, i.e. precisely the places where we don't want this overhead.

There seem to be other places where plinq+rx uses of async would be useful, but without going to the level of integrating async into linq expressions...

posted by ljw1004

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/lucian/archive/2010/02/13/req8-use-for-arrays.aspx

But having TWO different syntaxes in VB to write exactly the same thing? I'm sorry but I really don't like that!

--
Lucian

posted by ljw1004