Tweaking future unwrapping #1184
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I'm fine with merging this |
…ion triggered by a future we now keep that id alive locally. That will reduce the amount of necessary id splitting." This reverts commit 990d2b8.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adjusts our implementation to the latest draft of the Concurrency TS. It includes the following breaking changes:
future::unwrapandshared_future::unwrapwere removed. The functionality is still present via the futures implicit unwrapping constructors (the one forshared_futureis our own extension).future::thenandshared_future::thenperform implicit unwrapping only for thefuture<R>case (previously, all kinds of futures).Additionally, this PR also includes an optimization that was previously reverted due to failures caused by "too much implicit unwrapping" #588.