Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. USSøren Engel
    primarykey
    data
    text
    plurals
    1. COThanks for your explanation Stephen, it makes sense! I just read the blog post by Stephen Toub, and I can see why the sync wrapper may not be the best approach for most cases. In addition, I agree on the part with the Async CTP and upgrading to VS 2012. But currently, I have to make it work in VS 2010, sadly... Still, one thing that stills troubles my mind, is the fact that the sync wrapper does not work as I'd expect. I've followed the advise on using the ConfigureAwait(false), still no luck. Also, I've increased the delay to 500ms.
      singulars
    2. CO@YK1: Valid point, and this is also here I am not sure if I am actually doing the right thing - considering what I want to accomplish in the end. So basically I have my .net 4.5 library up and running, but I wish to make it support .net 4.0 as well. In order to do so, the only way I can see this is possible is to use the bcl.async package. I am not sure whether I should re-target my current .net 4.5 PCL to 4.0, or if I should (if possible), build two versions of my PCL, whereas the .net 4.0 version includes the bcl.async pack and the .net 4.5 version just uses the framework directly.
      singulars
    3. CO@StephenCleary: I've just experimented with it, and it seems that I don't get any warnings or errors if I create a PCL which supports .net 4.5 and add the microsoft.bcl.async pack. However, if I create a PCL that supports .net 4.0, add the async pack and that change the PCL to target .net 4.5, then I get errors about duplicate identifies for System.Threading.Tasks and System.Runtime.
      singulars
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload