Is it considered a no-no for class to extend `CoroutineScope`? e.g. ```class MyClass : CoroutineSco...

# coroutines

[Tucker Barbour]

Is it considered a no-no for class to extend CoroutineScope? e.g.

class MyClass : CoroutineScope by CoroutineScope(Dispatchers.Default) {
  fun doSomething() = produce {
    trySendBlocking(...)
  }
}

The objective is to have MyClass.doSomething return a ReceiveChannel using produce. Extending CoroutineScope seemed to be the most straightfoward way to accomplish this.

[Zach Klippenstein (he/him) [MOD]]

Yea, it’s discouraged. Put the scope in a private property instead

[Tucker Barbour]

private val scope = CoroutineScope(Dispachers.Default)

fun doSomething() = scope.produce { ... }

[Tucker Barbour]

any reason to delegate scope to lazy?

[Zach Klippenstein (he/him) [MOD]]

nope, scopes are cheap

[Zach Klippenstein (he/him) [MOD]]

I think this article probably covers the “why?“, although apparently medium is all behind a paywall now so i can’t be sure 😅

[Tucker Barbour]

cool, thanks for the feedback! I’ll change my implementation.

[Erik]

@Zach Klippenstein (he/him) [MOD] about the paywall: either pay, or open the article in a private/incognito window to circumvent the paywall 🏴‍☠️