Skip to content

Conversation

@Lanayx
Copy link
Contributor

@Lanayx Lanayx commented Apr 17, 2025

Added and! section

Summary

Describe your changes here.

Relates to dotnet/fsharp#18451


Internal previews

📄 File 🔗 Preview link
docs/fsharp/language-reference/task-expressions.md Tasks expressions

Added `and!` section
@Lanayx Lanayx requested review from a team, BillWagner and KathleenDollard as code owners April 17, 2025 20:58
@dotnetrepoman dotnetrepoman bot added this to the April 2025 milestone Apr 17, 2025
@dotnet-policy-service dotnet-policy-service bot added dotnet-fsharp/svc community-contribution Indicates PR is created by someone from the .NET community. labels Apr 17, 2025
@BillWagner
Copy link
Member

@T-Gro Can you give this a look?

Copy link
Member

@baronfel baronfel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This LGTM - @Lanayx would it be possible to link to the RFC/spec for how this is implemented so that users that want to understand the concurrency semantics can learn more? Something like:

For more details about this built-in support for concurrency, see RFC-1234

Also, there's a limitation involved with this current implementation, right? Might be good to have a Note: section outlining that rough edge.

@Lanayx
Copy link
Contributor Author

Lanayx commented Apr 18, 2025

This LGTM - @Lanayx would it be possible to link to the RFC/spec for how this is implemented so that users that want to understand the concurrency semantics can learn more? Something like:

It's possible of course, I thought about it, but I'm not sure it's needed in place. I see this page as a reference for "how to use it", rather than "how does it work inside", so the link to implementation is a bit off topic in my view. Maybe adding to the links list at the bottom is a better option?

Also, there's a limitation involved with this current implementation, right?

No, there are no limitations, only space to improve performance in future. I don't think we should mention it on this page.

@T-Gro
Copy link
Member

T-Gro commented Apr 24, 2025

Agree with @Lanayx , we don't put RFC details (sometimes very low level details) into docs ;; except for a footer as related links.

Copy link
Member

@BillWagner BillWagner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @Lanayx

This LGTM. I'll :shipit: after making a minor lint fix.

@BillWagner BillWagner enabled auto-merge (squash) April 24, 2025 14:29
@BillWagner BillWagner merged commit 108eae0 into dotnet:main Apr 24, 2025
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

community-contribution Indicates PR is created by someone from the .NET community. dotnet-fsharp/svc

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants