A modern programming language that makes developers happier.

kotlinlang

Trying to understand why two code snippets work the way they do regarding SupervisorJob and cancellation of children. More in thread

We got simple functions one, two three:
```suspend fun one() {
    println("one start")
    throw Exception("")
    println("one end")
}

fun two() {
    println("two start")
    throw Exception("")
    println("two end")
}

fun three() {
    println("three start")
    println("three end")
}```
One main function is this
```suspend fun main() {
    val scope = CoroutineScope(SupervisorJob() + Dispatchers.Default)
	val job = scope.launch {
        launch { one() }
        launch { two() }
    	launch { three() }
        println("done")
    }
	job.join()
}```
and the second one is this (Adding an extra supervisorScope in there)
```suspend fun main() {
    val scope = CoroutineScope(SupervisorJob() + Dispatchers.Default)
	val job = scope.launch {
        supervisorScope {
	        launch { one() }
	        launch { two() }
        	launch { three() }
            println("done")
        }
    }
	job.join()
}```
The first one, sometimes runs and prints
```done
one start```
and sometimes
```one start
done
three start
three end
two start```
The second one consistently prints out all of them as expected. one start, two start, done and the entire three prints.
```one start
done
three start
three end
two start```
As far as I understand, `scope` having a `SupervisorJob()` should make it so that child jobs should not cancel the parent and therefore the other children too. So I do not understand how the other launches may never be going off. Am I missing something here?

<https://pl.kotl.in/BMvglKQfo|#1> and <https://pl.kotl.in/3mNkfX5zW|#2> can be run here in play.kotlinlang

The `SupervisorJob` only changes its relationship with its own direct children. The second job you create, via scope.launch, isn't a supervisor job, so it still cancels its children on failure.

Right! I'm one layer deep there since I'm already inside the `launch`. Yeah you're right it does make sense then.