On 09/29/2015 11:15 AM, Daniel Lowrey wrote:
On Sep 28, 2015, at 3:29 AM, S.A.N <ua.san.a...@gmail.com> wrote:> > Are there any future plans
for - async/await?> This need to know now, not to use these words to constants, and class names...>
> -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List> To unsubscribe, visit:
http://www.php.net/unsub.php>
Would this be awesome? Yes. The issue is that all of PHP's built-in IO
operations are currently synchronous. It would/will require a massive
effort to (1) install the infrastructure to offload blocking operations to
worker threads and/or (2) convert many synchronous IO operations to a
non-blocking paradigm. Someone has to do that work ... and it's a lot. I
don't personally see this happening before 8.0 though I'd be happy to be
surprised.
FWIW I'm a big proponent of libuv here and think we could significantly
improve PHP as a language by incorporating it to solve this (and other)
outstanding issues in a cross-OS manner.
In the nearer term, this is exactly the sort of thing the Generator Return
and Generator Delegation RFCs implemented in 7.0 are designed to handle.
With a minimal amount of userland code you can resolve coroutines in
userland as lightweight threads in which IO is accomplished with
non-blocking libraries.
The obvious drawbacks to using yield in userland as a surrogate for
async/await is the proliferation of non-standard userland libraries (of
which several good options already exist) to manage IO, timers and event
loops.
IMHO userland shouldn't know anything about *how* concurrency is achieved
(whether using threads or nbio). With something like libuv internal C code
would have access to a built-in worker thread pool designed specifically
for a non-blocking paradigm. This would allow us to expose the best of both
worlds.
Just my $0.02 on the topic.
I think we can spoonfeed the massive undertaking a bit by spreading it
across several iterations just to get things going. An idea I had was to
just begin by providing coroutines as part of the language. That would
include a `\Coroutine` class, as well as await / async keywords. This
would at least enable third party async libraries to be more compatible
since they would have the same await types and semantics.
The next step (or at the same time as the first) is to provide some sort
of `\EventLoopInterface` along with
\EventLoop::getLoop(): \EventLoopInterface
\EventLoop::setLoop(\EventLoopInterface)
\EventLoop::run()
\EventLoop::stop()
\EventLoop::tick()
To start out, just provide the internal coroutine scheduler as a default
implementation. Coroutines would use the "event loop" to schedule resumes.
Doing so would allow even more interoperability if a library chose to
implement `\EventLoopInterface` in its event loop, where it handles
coroutine scheduling (or lets it fall back to the internal one), and
could also provide I/O "extras".
The final step would be to bring libuv into PHP, itself as a better
default implementation of `\EventLoopInterface`.
Just my idea.
--
Stephen
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
