Also, @elizarov, what about the general naming for coroutine builders? AFAIR, the initial idea was to create an API which would feel somewhat like language constructs. That would imply using short one-syllabic names for coroutine builders and scoping functions, but now we have monsters like

runBlocking {}

, etc. Can't we rename that into

blocking {}

?

voddan:

blocking

was one of the original naming options. We've decided to use longer, scarier name (because it is scary -- it blocks a thread), while also making clearer what it does -- it "runs" the block of code similar to the stdlib's

run

, but it also blocks your thread. Hence

runBlocking

.

IMO the reference to

run

is very obscure and hardly adds any clarity (in my opinion, again)

We also wanted a verb there, but

blocking

is not a verb, while calling it

block

would be confusing, too. That was another original reason in favor of

defer

(which is a verb) vs

async

(which is not), but

async

is way more recognizable, indeed, while

defer

, as it turns out, is not even known as a verb to less English-savvy people.

mne, IMHO anything that is used often enough should be elegant

It is a pain that so many standard JDK methods with nice and short names would actually block your thread.

Future.get()

anyone?

Methods and stand alone scoping functions are different in my head for some reason. For example I am okey with

forEach

(method), but would not be okey with anything but

repeat

(stand alone scoping function)