为什么 CompletableFuture 和 ListenableFuture 的协程构建器之间存在差异?
Why is there a difference between coroutine builders for CompletableFuture and ListenableFuture?
在检查 Kotlin 协程的源代码时,我注意到 JDK 8 CompletableFuture
之间存在差异(标记为 **
)
public fun <T> future(
context: CoroutineContext = DefaultDispatcher,
start: CoroutineStart = CoroutineStart.DEFAULT,
block: suspend CoroutineScope.() -> T
): CompletableFuture<T> {
require(!start.isLazy) { "$start start is not supported" }
val newContext = newCoroutineContext(context)
val job = Job(newContext[Job])
val future = CompletableFutureCoroutine<T>(newContext + job)
job.cancelFutureOnCompletion(future)
** future.whenComplete { _, exception -> job.cancel(exception) } **
start(block, receiver=future, completion=future) // use the specified start strategy
return future
}
private class CompletableFutureCoroutine<T>(
override val context: CoroutineContext
) : CompletableFuture<T>(), Continuation<T>, CoroutineScope {
override val coroutineContext: CoroutineContext get() = context
override val isActive: Boolean get() = context[Job]!!.isActive
override fun resume(value: T) { complete(value) }
override fun resumeWithException(exception: Throwable) { completeExceptionally(exception) }
** doesn't override cancel which corresponds to interrupt task **
}
public fun <T> future(
context: CoroutineContext = DefaultDispatcher,
start: CoroutineStart = CoroutineStart.DEFAULT,
block: suspend CoroutineScope.() -> T
): ListenableFuture<T> {
require(!start.isLazy) { "$start start is not supported" }
val newContext = newCoroutineContext(context)
val job = Job(newContext[Job])
val future = ListenableFutureCoroutine<T>(newContext + job)
job.cancelFutureOnCompletion(future)
start(block, receiver=future, completion=future) // use the specified start strategy
return future
}
private class ListenableFutureCoroutine<T>(
override val context: CoroutineContext
) : AbstractFuture<T>(), Continuation<T>, CoroutineScope {
override val coroutineContext: CoroutineContext get() = context
override val isActive: Boolean get() = context[Job]!!.isActive
override fun resume(value: T) { set(value) }
override fun resumeWithException(exception: Throwable) { setException(exception) }
** override fun interruptTask() { context[Job]!!.cancel() } **
}
集成,虽然我认为类型几乎相同(当然 ListenableFuture
不能直接完成,但我不明白为什么这在这里很重要)。这种差异背后是否有特定原因?
CompletableFuture.cancel 是一个开放(可覆盖)方法,但它不是为覆盖 设计的。它的文档不为其调用取消提供任何保证,因此了解 CompletableFuture
已被取消的唯一面向未来(双关语)的方法是在其上安装 whenComplete
侦听器。
例如,JDK 的未来版本添加另一种方法来取消不在内部调用 cancel
的未来是完全合法的。这样的更改不会违反任何 CompletableFuture
合同。
将此与 AbstractFuture.interruptTask 上的文档进行比较。此方法明确设计用于覆盖,其文档保证调用它的条件。因此,我们可以为 ListenableFuture
构建器提供稍微更有效的实现,避免创建 lambda 以在其上安装取消侦听器。
在检查 Kotlin 协程的源代码时,我注意到 JDK 8 CompletableFuture
之间存在差异(标记为**
)
public fun <T> future(
context: CoroutineContext = DefaultDispatcher,
start: CoroutineStart = CoroutineStart.DEFAULT,
block: suspend CoroutineScope.() -> T
): CompletableFuture<T> {
require(!start.isLazy) { "$start start is not supported" }
val newContext = newCoroutineContext(context)
val job = Job(newContext[Job])
val future = CompletableFutureCoroutine<T>(newContext + job)
job.cancelFutureOnCompletion(future)
** future.whenComplete { _, exception -> job.cancel(exception) } **
start(block, receiver=future, completion=future) // use the specified start strategy
return future
}
private class CompletableFutureCoroutine<T>(
override val context: CoroutineContext
) : CompletableFuture<T>(), Continuation<T>, CoroutineScope {
override val coroutineContext: CoroutineContext get() = context
override val isActive: Boolean get() = context[Job]!!.isActive
override fun resume(value: T) { complete(value) }
override fun resumeWithException(exception: Throwable) { completeExceptionally(exception) }
** doesn't override cancel which corresponds to interrupt task **
}
public fun <T> future(
context: CoroutineContext = DefaultDispatcher,
start: CoroutineStart = CoroutineStart.DEFAULT,
block: suspend CoroutineScope.() -> T
): ListenableFuture<T> {
require(!start.isLazy) { "$start start is not supported" }
val newContext = newCoroutineContext(context)
val job = Job(newContext[Job])
val future = ListenableFutureCoroutine<T>(newContext + job)
job.cancelFutureOnCompletion(future)
start(block, receiver=future, completion=future) // use the specified start strategy
return future
}
private class ListenableFutureCoroutine<T>(
override val context: CoroutineContext
) : AbstractFuture<T>(), Continuation<T>, CoroutineScope {
override val coroutineContext: CoroutineContext get() = context
override val isActive: Boolean get() = context[Job]!!.isActive
override fun resume(value: T) { set(value) }
override fun resumeWithException(exception: Throwable) { setException(exception) }
** override fun interruptTask() { context[Job]!!.cancel() } **
}
集成,虽然我认为类型几乎相同(当然 ListenableFuture
不能直接完成,但我不明白为什么这在这里很重要)。这种差异背后是否有特定原因?
CompletableFuture.cancel 是一个开放(可覆盖)方法,但它不是为覆盖 设计的。它的文档不为其调用取消提供任何保证,因此了解 CompletableFuture
已被取消的唯一面向未来(双关语)的方法是在其上安装 whenComplete
侦听器。
例如,JDK 的未来版本添加另一种方法来取消不在内部调用 cancel
的未来是完全合法的。这样的更改不会违反任何 CompletableFuture
合同。
将此与 AbstractFuture.interruptTask 上的文档进行比较。此方法明确设计用于覆盖,其文档保证调用它的条件。因此,我们可以为 ListenableFuture
构建器提供稍微更有效的实现,避免创建 lambda 以在其上安装取消侦听器。