TaskGroup: Keeping a Reference to Child Tasks?

[ktoso (Konrad 'ktoso' Malawski 🐟🏴‍☠️)]

@bdkjones

In other words, if the Task does not capture self, it does not block other Tasks from running simultaneously?

Here's a recent thread on this: @_inheritActorContext does not inherit the actor context in certain situations You can confirm the behavior yourself based on those snippets.

@DevAndArtist

My naive thinking is that we don't really need to guard the child task escaping through a reference. The task group guarantees that all child tasks will be done when the group itself is finished, so the reference would only return either a value or an error and the explicit cancelation would be a no-op.

As usual with concurrency and guarantees it is not quite as naive and trivial to declare it'll be simple...

Do we guarantee that they're finished or finished and DESTROYED? Because that's what we actually do today.

It's worth an in depth investigation, but it's not as simple as just a missing method we can just throw on there. It might have big implications.