Changes to JEP 453

[Rob Bygrave]

*>  `STILLBORN` state*

My feedback - I'd look for another name for this state. That word might be
a fairly deep emotional trigger for some folks so imo I'd hope for an
alternative for that state.

Now 2c

On Fri, 19 May 2023 at 12:17, Rob Bygrave <robin.bygrave at gmail.com> wrote:

> *> all Concurrent Tasks should be Structured*
>
> That was my thought too, there isn't a "UnstructuredTaskScope" per se [and
> I don't think there will be one in the future?] ... so the "Structured"
> part of StructuredTaskScope can seem unnecessary. It feels like it could be
> "TaskScope" perhaps?
>
>
>
> *> `StructuredTaskScope` is not a task though, but it is really a scope*
>
> fwiw I agree, I think of it as a "scope" that contains "tasks" [that will
> usually run concurrently].
>
>
> My 1c
>
>
> On Fri, 19 May 2023 at 10:01, Attila Kelemen <attila.kelemen85 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> >
>> > So, what does "Subtask" mean when there is no "Task"?
>> >
>> >
>> > Personally, I would go with either just "Task" or "StructuredScopeTask"
>> as "Subtask" is sort of inventing new terminology.
>> >
>> > If you renamed "StructuredTaskScope" to just "Task" then "Subtask"
>> would make more sense as it is something spawned from a Task. This would be
>> my preferred choice. Shorter names for common things... in particular
>> things that should become common.
>> >
>> > However, what is the relationship to "Task" with all those other things
>> called "...Task..." Maybe just "ConcurrentTask" and "ConcurrentSubtask" are
>> more meaningful, but "java.util.concurrent.Task" and
>> "java.util.concurrent.Subtask" are probably clear enough.
>> >
>> > In a sense, we would be saying that all Concurrent Tasks should be
>> Structured.
>>
>> `StructuredTaskScope` is not a task though, but it is really a scope
>> (besides, a simple name like `Task` would conflict with a lot of
>> existing things, which would be horrible, even if others shouldn't
>> have given such a simple name as well).
>>
>> The way I imagine it is that the "task" you are looking for is the
>> block between the creation and closing of `StructuredTaskScope`.
>> Still, obviously naming this is difficult, because it is also not
>> exactly a task (I mean it has a task() method for confusion, and that
>> is not the parent, but actually the action of the `Subtask`, but I
>> believe the `task()` method should be removed, as it is harmful). As
>> far as usage goes, this wants to be a reference to the result of the
>> task, but the existence of `state()` would make it awkward to call it
>> some kind of result (also then `get` would return the result of a
>> result, which is also awkward). So yeah, it should be
>> `ResultReferenceWithStateOfComputation` :). Though, on a second note,
>> it could be called result, and you could think of state as the state
>> the result is in (since you are not really expected to rely on this
>> changing, and should not use it before `join`).
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/attachments/20230519/d2f8d3d7/attachment.htm>