A modern programming language that makes developers happier.

kotlinlang

Hi, is `Semaphore` meant to be at application layer? My case it to enforce only 1 caller of synchronization at a time

If you only want one caller at a time and you know it's not going to change to another number, you want to use `Mutex` instead.

right, it will work, but im confused if there should be such api used in between my business logic which syncing basically is

but I guess people use Channels for data flow, and theyre also a coroutine primitive, so ..

may I ask, difference with coroutine Mutex or Semaphore is that it gets suspended on that point, and thread is freed to do others stuff -- as usual, right?

There's multiple differences. Semaphore can allow a given number of acquirers that is greater than one for example. The docs are good at explaining each of these.

I know what those two do, I only meant them as a coroutine api, vs their thread equivalent

Blocking threads is more wasteful, and that's the only thing the non coroutines-friendly version can do.