Skip to content

Add withAsyncThrow? #161

Open
Open

Description

@lazamar

I often need to run some important background task which I don't have to wait on and should be cancelled when I'm done.
However, it should interrupt me if it fails.

I've often needed it when writing tests and have been bitten by using withAsync bg (const fg) and having issues with the background task silently failing.

One possible pattern is to remember to always use link in these cases, but link turns synchronous exceptions into asynchronous ones which is a bit weird and not the most ergonomic pattern.

How about having something like the following? Would make link unnecessary for spawning threads you don't need to wait on.

withAsyncThrow :: IO a -> IO b -> IO b
withAsyncThrow left right =
  withAsync left $ \l -> 
  withAsync right $ \r -> do
  e <- waitEither l r
  case e of
    Left _ -> wait r
    Right v -> return v

Might need a better name (withConcurrent?) but others seem to have come across this need in the past too #128

Activity

  1. mitchellwrosen commented on Nov 5, 2024

    @mitchellwrosen

    @lazamar I can recommend ki for this use case, though of course async can achieve a similar effect:

    Ki.scoped \scope -> do
      void (Ki.fork scope importantBackgroundTask)
      ...

    Here, importantBackgroundTask will run in a separate thread, propagate any exception if it fails, and will automatically be cancelled at the end of the ... block if it's still running.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions