Hacker Newsnew | comments | ask | jobs | submitlogin
int_19h 533 days ago | link | parent

The problem in the linked article is not async/await, but rather specifically async void, which you don't get by following the straightforward sync->async refactoring rules. A normal void method would start returning Task when turned async (and a non-void method returning T would start returning Task<T>). Async void is a special, distinct beast which is fire-and-forget by definition, and it only exists in async land. Perhaps they should have used a special new keyword for that instead, but in any case, it's a completely orthogonal problem.

Lists | RSS | Bookmarklet | Guidelines | FAQ | DMCA | News News | Feature Requests | Bugs | Y Combinator | Apply | Library