From ba2bf9103859171df6d574052bfd7c22a26ee700 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kendra Havens Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 10:06:46 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] Clarify when methods should end in Async Using corrected text suggested in bug on the in-product recommendation. --- docs/csharp/programming-guide/concepts/async/index.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/docs/csharp/programming-guide/concepts/async/index.md b/docs/csharp/programming-guide/concepts/async/index.md index 96c3d1f670ad3..685e60c61e4c9 100644 --- a/docs/csharp/programming-guide/concepts/async/index.md +++ b/docs/csharp/programming-guide/concepts/async/index.md @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ Asynchronous APIs in Windows Runtime programming have one of the following retur ## Naming convention - By convention, you append "Async" to the names of methods that have an `async` modifier. +By convention, methods that return commonly awaitable types (e.g. `Task`, `Task`, `ValueTask`, `ValueTask`) should have names that end with "Async". Methods that start an asynchronous operation but do not return an awaitable type should not have names that end with "Async", but may start with "Begin", "Start" or some other verb to suggest this method does not return or throw the result of the operation. You can ignore the convention where an event, base class, or interface contract suggests a different name. For example, you shouldn’t rename common event handlers, such as `Button1_Click`.