[steveklabnik]

> The problems section isn't really convincing to me though.

It was a big enough problem that the language was almost forked over it.

> It would be great if

Rust is low-level enough that you can do this, and some people have. But then people have to use your package. std is only special in that it can use unstable code but be part of stable Rust; otherwise, it's just regular old Rust code. The community overall abandoned all of those other things and is coalescing around Tokio, which could also be considered this, in a sense. Or Rayon, if you want data parallelism rather than async IO.

[infogulch]

Would it be possible to make functions generic over coroutines/async?

One of the worst parts of async is there's an infectious duplication of pretty much all library code where there are separate sync/async versions of everything. See C# DoXxx() & DoXxxAsync() everywhere, where the only difference between the two implementations are an annotation and some keywords sprinkled throughout. If rust can do the same thing without doubling the code/api surface/documentation across all libraries that would allay the fears of many opponents.

[skyde]

Haskell is doing this already with par and seq function to control parallel and lazy evaluation. I believe we should have something like this for Async

[xfer]

You can do DoXxx() using DoXxxAsync() by calling wait() on the future it returns. No duplicated code necessary.

[infogulch]

It's nice that that'll work but it's... kinda gross. Can it call wait() automatically via some auto type conversion? Ideally in a synchronous context it would call wait(), and in an async context it would automatically annotate await (and you could always override by calling wait() manually).