Async/Await syntax support #121
Comments
|
Seems like 0.3 alpha 3 has a compatibility layer with futures 0.1 that includes Tokio compatibility. |
|
Thank you for opening this issue! I don't have the time to look into it right now (and likely won't have time for a while), but I agree that this is important. I'm happy to assist by reviewing reviewing pull requests or with general feedback. Side note: There's a problem with the current stream-based API. Something to keep in mind when updating or redesigning the API. |
blckngm
added a commit
to blckngm/inotify
that referenced
this issue
Sep 12, 2019
Update tokio to 0.2 and futures to 0.3. The crate is updated to the 2018 edition, so that related tests and examples can be written in async/await.
blckngm
added a commit
to blckngm/inotify
that referenced
this issue
Sep 15, 2019
Update tokio to 0.2 and futures to 0.3. The crate is updated to the 2018 edition, so that related tests and examples can be written in async/await.
This was referenced Sep 18, 2019
Closed
|
We've had support for async/await for a while now. Closing. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Futures 0.3 will support the Async/Await syntax.
One it reaches GA, Tokio will be next.
We should investigate what it will require of us to support the new syntax and prepare ourselves for it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: