Beginner here… Is it a typical pattern to pass around the coroutine scope as a parameter to my suspe...

# coroutines

[dorf]

Beginner here… Is it a typical pattern to pass around the coroutine scope as a parameter to my suspen functions?

[zak.taccardi]

nope

[octylFractal]

that's a very big anti-pattern usually

[zak.taccardi]

a suspend function`s scope is the scope that called the suspend function

[octylFractal]

and if you need a new scope object specifically, use coroutineScope { ... }

[octylFractal]

that enforces structured concurrency

[zak.taccardi]

use coroutineScope { } to access a nested scope under the coroutine scope that called the suspending function

https://kotlin.github.io/kotlinx.coroutines/kotlinx-coroutines-core/kotlinx.coroutines/coroutine-scope.html

[zak.taccardi]

pretty much the only time you pass around a CoroutineScope is when injecting it into a class’s constructor

[zak.taccardi]

very rarely as a function parameter.

[dorf]

then which async do I call? I suppose not the GlobalScope’s

[zak.taccardi]

you create an instance of CoroutineScope and store it somewhere. For example on Android I would create an instance of CoroutineScope(Dispatchers.Default) and store it in the Application subclass

[dorf]

oh, I see. I use Ktor, so I do have an application object that also serves as the coroutine scope

[zak.taccardi]

and inject it into classes that are scoped to the Application as well

[zak.taccardi]

I haven’t used ktor , but is the async you are trying to use scoped to an API call? or globally to the JVM?

[zak.taccardi]

I’m not sure what the Ktor equivalent to Android’s Application would be

[zak.taccardi]

if it’s an API call, I imagine you have some type of function to handle that request like:

suspend fun handleRequest(request: Request): Response

So you could build an object graph for any dependencies related to that call:

suspend fun handleRequest(request: Request): Response = coroutineScope {
  val scope : CoroutineScope = this@coroutineScope
  val graph = SomeGraphForThisApiCall(scope, otherDependencies)
}

[dorf]

that seems like a little too much boilerplate just to be able to run code asynchronously - is there a simpler way? how bad is it to do GlobalScope.async?

[zak.taccardi]

if code quality/correctness does not matter to you, then you can use GlobalScope

[octylFractal]

it is honestly not that much boiler plate -- all you really need to do is say coroutineScope { ... }

[zak.taccardi]

however if this is within the scope of an API call, an error thrown by GlobalScope.async { } will not be thrown from where you call it, unless you use .await() on the deferred that’s returned

[zak.taccardi]

@dorf you can do:

suspend fun handleRequest(request: Request): Response = coroutineScope {
  async {
    ...
  }
}

[octylFractal]

an important thing to note is that I would expect that with ktor, there is almost no need to use async

if you make an I/O call (or other blocking work), use withContext(<http://Dispatchers.IO|Dispatchers.IO>) { ... }, if you suspend ktor will probably switch to handling other requests automatically, as that's what coroutines are meant to do

[octylFractal]

the only thing async is good for is parallel processing of work

[dorf]

so does this makes sense?

private suspend fun searchAllEngines(input: String) = coroutineScope {
        searchEngines.map {
            async<Collection<Result>> {
                try {
                    it.search(input)
                } catch (exc: Exception) {
                    logger.error("${it::class.simpleName} failed: ${exc.message}")
                    emptyList()
                }
            }
        }
    }

[octylFractal]

sure, as long as it.search is also suspend and appropriately switches to the IO dispatcher

[dorf]

cool 👍 thanks!