Hum, handling the first to error and interrupt the others is a good use case.
From what I read, Loom structured concurency will not automatically interrupt the other tasks though. And the .close I think will wait for all of them to complete. They said it's because you might not always want other tasks to cancel, so they made it more explicit.
But arguably, maybe if you had a catch in there it would be triggered on the first task to throw. But I can also imagine a similar function to wait for the first future to return or error in Clojure. Though I'm guessing at that point one might say that's just implementing structured concurency?
My question maybe was about the need to close virtual threads. Are they just abusing Closeable so you can use .close as a wait for all to complete even when errors are thrown feature, or do you actually leak resources if you don't clean up Virtual Threads you're done using?
From what I read, Loom structured concurency will not automatically interrupt the other tasks though. And the .close I think will wait for all of them to complete. They said it's because you might not always want other tasks to cancel, so they made it more explicit.
But arguably, maybe if you had a catch in there it would be triggered on the first task to throw. But I can also imagine a similar function to wait for the first future to return or error in Clojure. Though I'm guessing at that point one might say that's just implementing structured concurency?
My question maybe was about the need to close virtual threads. Are they just abusing Closeable so you can use .close as a wait for all to complete even when errors are thrown feature, or do you actually leak resources if you don't clean up Virtual Threads you're done using?