Business policy inside a StructuredTaskScope

[Robert Engels]

I would create a top-level facade method that loads the products that takes an array and hides the scope details rather than writing it like that.  

> On Sep 11, 2023, at 4:09 PM, David <david.vlijmincx at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have a question about where the business logic / shutdown policy is supposed to be when you extend from a StructuredTaskScope. Looking at online examples it seems like the business logic is supposed to be in the handleComplete method of a class that extends StructuredTaskScope, but is this not too far away from the place it is being used?
> 
> Currently, I am using the following scope as it keeps the shutdown policy closer to where the scope is used in my code, but I do not know if this is the correct way of creating your own scopes. 
> 
> class TriggerScope<T> extends StructuredTaskScope<T> {
> 
>     final private Function<StructuredTaskScope.Subtask<? extends T>, Boolean> trigger;
> 
>     TriggerScope(Function<StructuredTaskScope.Subtask<? extends T>, Boolean> trigger) {
>         this.trigger = trigger;
>     }
> 
>     @Override
>     protected void handleComplete(Subtask<? extends T> subtask) {
>         if (trigger.apply(subtask)) {
>             shutdown();
>         }
>     }
> }
> The above scope allows me to implement a new scope like below:
> public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
> 
>     Main main = new Main();
> 
>     try (var scope = new TriggerScope<Product>(main::trigger)) {
> 
>         StructuredTaskScope.Subtask<Product> fork = scope.fork(() -> new Product(50));
>         StructuredTaskScope.Subtask<Product> fork1 = scope.fork(() -> new Product(100));
>         StructuredTaskScope.Subtask<Product> fork2 = scope.fork(() -> new Product(150));
> 
>         scope.join();
>     }
> 
> }
> 
> private boolean trigger(StructuredTaskScope.Subtask<? extends Product> subtask) {
>     if (Subtask.State.SUCCESS.equals(subtask.state()) && subtask.get().price() > 50 && subtask.get().price() < 150){
>         System.out.println("result: " + subtask.get().price());
>         return true;
>     }
>     return false;
> }
> 
> In my opinion, this way is more convenient, but is this still a correct implementation or does this deviate too much from the original idea of creating a scope in its own class?
> 
> Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
> 
> Kind regards,
> David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/loom-dev/attachments/20230911/073dcfce/attachment.htm>