[Concurrency][docs] More docs about task groups being structured concurrency #82558
Conversation
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
| /// You may use `group.cancelAll()` to signal cancellation to all the remaining in-progress tasks, | ||
| /// however this will not interrupt their execution automatically, as the child tasks will need to cooperatively | ||
| /// react to the cancellation, and potentially return early (if able to). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Avoiding "may" which can be ambiguous between what's allowed and what's possible. Breaking up a long sentence.
| /// You may use `group.cancelAll()` to signal cancellation to all the remaining in-progress tasks, | |
| /// however this will not interrupt their execution automatically, as the child tasks will need to cooperatively | |
| /// react to the cancellation, and potentially return early (if able to). | |
| /// You can use `group.cancelAll()` to signal cancellation to the remaining in-progress tasks, | |
| /// however this doesn't interrupt their execution automatically. | |
| /// Rather, the child tasks need to cooperatively react to the cancellation, | |
| /// and return early if that's possible. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After marking several editorial fixes back to "unresolved" because they weren't fixed in the latest diff, I wonder if something went wrong with your commit-squash-force-push workflow? I see the previous commit this PR used to point to included a bunch of these fixes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmmm, thanks, let me double check -- maybe I pushed over the GH applied changes 😟
|
Thanks Alex, I’ll apply those! |
|
Applied the changes and following up with a few more, thanks for the review @amartini51 ! |
…urrency And correct an incorrect statement specifically in the withTaskGroup API, while other APIs already had correct versions of the statement. refs swiftlang#82396
ktoso
force-pushed
the
wip-cleanup-group-docs
branch
from
744ef5a to
55b4418
Compare
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll stop re-reviewing for now, since it looks like some of the editorial corrections you applied in 744ef5a were lost when you rebased or force-pushed. Will take another look after you restore those.
|
Reapplied the lost changes, sorry about that @amartini51 |
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
|
@swift-ci please smoke test macOS |
|
@swift-ci please smoke test Windows |
Revise task group docs for style, fixing issues in the content changed in #82558 and some nearby content.
And correct an incorrect statement specifically in the withTaskGroup API, while other APIs already had correct versions of the statement.
refs #82396
resolves rdar://154000871
Would you mind having an editorial look @amartini51 ?