-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 224
Should we provide our own join
and select
, or leave it to users?
#1098
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
join!
and select
, or leave it to users?join
and select
, or leave it to users?
All of these can easily be pulled in via |
It might still be worth documenting that What would be a good place? Maybe |
Maybe in the module description of godot::task? |
Also possible. Over time, we could then expand that with some examples. The standard library typically does this too: |
Since PR #1043, we now have an async runtime. I tried using
futures::join!
andfutures::select!
, and both worked well. I also tried futures-litezip
andor
— lightweight alternatives tojoin
andselect
that support only two futures. (itest: futures and futures-lite )join
andselect
seem highly useful in game development, yet Godot lacks similar built-in functionality.Will gdext consider implementing them in the future, or should this be left to users, similar to how
rand
is handled?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: