Is it a bad idea to pass a `CoroutineScope` to a f...

# coroutines

[gsala]

Is it a bad idea to pass a CoroutineScope to a function, instead of making the function suspendable and then call coroutineScope {} inside?
What I'm going for:

fun connect(
            device: BluetoothDevice,
            connectionScope: CoroutineScope,
    ): StateFlow<BleConnectionState>

I want to have the consumers of this API decide what the lifetime/scope of the BLE connection should be

[marstran]

Letting the caller decide the scope is a normal convention. The way many people do it is to take the scope as an receiver parameter:

fun CoroutineScope.connect(device: BluetoothDevice): StateFlow<BleConnectionState>

[gsala]

This helped me understand a couple of things. But what about if the function is a member function of a class with some state I need to mutate? If I declare it as an extension function, it can't be called publicly.
Would it be then good practice to have it as a function parameter?

[wasyl]

> If I declare it as an extension function, it can’t be called publicly.
Just fyi, you can, although it’s not very convenient