Considering the following
type MyClass () =
member x.ReadStreamAsync(stream:Stream) =
async {
let tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<int>()
let buffer = Array.create 2048 0uy
let! bytesReadCount = stream.ReadAsync(buffer, 0, buffer.Length) |> Async.AwaitTask
if bytesReadCount > 0 then
for i in 0..bytesReadCount do
if buffer.[i] = 10uy then
tcs.SetResult(i)
// Omitted more code to handle the case if 10uy is not found..
return tcs.Task
}
The code reads from a stream until in meets a certain character (represented by a byte value) at which point the task returned by the method completes.
The function signature of DoSomethingAsync is unit -> Async<Task<int>>, but I would like it to be unit -> Task<int> such that it can be used more generally in .NET.
Can this be done in F# using an asynchronous expression, or do I can to rely more on the Task constructs of .NET?
Given that you don't actually use the async workflow for anything in your example, the easiest solution would be to forgo it entirely:
member x.DoSomethingAsync() =
let tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<int>()
Task.Delay(100).Wait()
tcs.SetResult(10)
tcs.Task
This implementation of DoSomethingAsync has the type unit -> Task<int>.
It's not clear to me exactly what you're trying to do, but why don't you just do the following?
member x.DoSomethingAsync() =
async {
do! Async.Sleep 100
return 10 } |> Async.StartAsTask
This implementation also has the type unit -> Task<int>.
Based on the updated question, here's a way to do it:
member x.DoSomethingAsync(stream:Stream) =
async {
let buffer = Array.create 2048 0uy
let! bytesReadCount =
stream.ReadAsync(buffer, 0, buffer.Length) |> Async.AwaitTask
if bytesReadCount > 0
then
let res =
[0..bytesReadCount]
|> List.tryFind (fun i -> buffer.[i] = 10uy)
return defaultArg res -1
else return -1
}
|> Async.StartAsTask
The DoSomethingAsync function has the type Stream -> System.Task<int>. I didn't know what to do in the else case, so I just put -1, but I'm sure you can replace it with something more correct.
Related
I'm being a little adventurous with my code for the amount of experience I have with F# and I am a little worried about cross threading issues.
Background:
I have a number of orders where I need to validate the address. Some of the orders can be validated against google maps geocoding API which allows 50/ second. the rest are Australian PO Boxes which we don't have many of - but I need to validate them against a different API that only allows 1 call per second.
I have switched over most of my code from async{} functions to task{} functions and I am assuming to get something on several threads at the same time it needs to be in an async{} function or block and be piped to Async.Parallel
Question: Is this the right way to do this or will it fall over? I am wondering if I am fundamentally thinking about this the wrong way.
Notes:
I am passing a database context into the async function and updating the database within that function
I will call this from a C# ( WPF ) Application and report the progress
Am I going to have cross threading issues?
let validateOrder
(
order: artooProvider.dataContext.``dbo.OrdersEntity``,
httpClient: HttpClient,
ctx: artooProvider.dataContext,
isAuPoBox: bool
) =
async {
// Validate Address
let! addressExceptions = ValidateAddress.validateAddress (order, httpClient, ctx, isAuPoBox) |> Async.AwaitTask
// SaveExceptions
do! ctx.SubmitUpdatesAsync()
// return Exception count
return ""
}
let validateGMapOrders(httpClient: HttpClient, ctx: artooProvider.dataContext, orders: artooProvider.dataContext.``dbo.OrdersEntity`` list) =
async {
let ordersChunked = orders |> List.chunkBySize 50
for fiftyOrders in ordersChunked do
let! tasks =
fiftyOrders
|> List.map (fun (order) -> validateOrder (order, httpClient, ctx, false) )
|> Async.Parallel
do! Async.Sleep(2000)
}
let validateOrders (ctx: artooProvider.dataContext, progress: IProgress<DownloadProgressModel>) =
task {
let unvalidatedOrders =
query {
for orders in ctx.Dbo.Orders do
where (orders.IsValidated.IsNone)
select (orders)
}
|> Seq.toList
let auPoBoxOrders =
unvalidatedOrders
|> List.filter (fun order -> isAUPoBox(order) = true )
let gMapOrders =
unvalidatedOrders
|> List.filter (fun order -> isAUPoBox(order) = false )
let googleHttpClient = new HttpClient()
let auspostHttpclient = Auspost.AuspostApi.getApiClient ()
// Google maps validations
do! validateGMapOrders(googleHttpClient,ctx,gMapOrders)
// PO Box Validations
for position in 0 .. auPoBoxOrders.Length - 1 do
let! result = validateOrder (gMapOrders[position], auspostHttpclient, ctx, true)
do! Task.Delay(1000)
return true
}
When I have had to deal with rate-limited API problems I hide that API behind a MailboxProcessor that maintains an internal time to comply with the rate limit but appears as a normal async API from the outside.
Since you have two API's with different rate limits I'd parameterise the time delay and processing action then create one object for each API.
open System
type Request = string
type Response = string
type RateLimitedProcessor() =
// Initialise 1s in past so ready to start immediately.
let mutable lastCall = DateTime.Now - TimeSpan(0, 0, 1)
let mbox = new MailboxProcessor<Request * AsyncReplyChannel<Response>>((fun mbox ->
let rec f () =
async {
let! (req, reply) = mbox.Receive()
let msSinceCall = (DateTime.Now - lastCall).Milliseconds
// wait 1s between requests
if msSinceCall < 1000 then
do! Async.Sleep (1000 - msSinceCall)
lastCall <- DateTime.Now
reply.Reply "Response"
// Call self recursively to process the next incoming message
return! f()
}
f()
))
do mbox.Start()
member __.Process(req:Request): Async<Response> =
async {
return! mbox.PostAndAsyncReply(fun reply -> req, reply)
}
interface IDisposable with
member this.Dispose() = (mbox :> IDisposable).Dispose()
This is not for a practical need, but rather to try to learn something.
I am using FSToolKit's asyncResult expression which is very handy and I would like to know if there is a way to 'combine' expressions, such as async and result here, or does a custom expression have to be written?
Here is an example of my function to set the ip to a subdomain, with CloudFlare:
let setSubdomainToIpAsync zoneName url ip =
let decodeResult (r: CloudFlareResult<'a>) =
match r.Success with
| true -> Ok r.Result
| false -> Error r.Errors.[0].Message
let getZoneAsync (client: CloudFlareClient) =
asyncResult {
let! r = client.Zones.GetAsync()
let! d = decodeResult r
return!
match d |> Seq.filter (fun x -> x.Name = zoneName) |> Seq.toList with
| z::_ -> Ok z // take the first one
| _ -> Error $"zone '{zoneName}' not found"
}
let getRecordsAsync (client: CloudFlareClient) zoneId =
asyncResult {
let! r = client.Zones.DnsRecords.GetAsync(zoneId)
return! decodeResult r
}
let updateRecordAsync (client: CloudFlareClient) zoneId (records: DnsRecord seq) =
asyncResult {
return!
match records |> Seq.filter (fun x -> x.Name = url) |> Seq.toList with
| r::_ -> client.Zones.DnsRecords.UpdateAsync(zoneId, r.Id, ModifiedDnsRecord(Name = url, Content = ip, Type = DnsRecordType.A, Proxied = true))
| [] -> client.Zones.DnsRecords.AddAsync(zoneId, NewDnsRecord(Name = url, Content = ip, Proxied = true))
}
asyncResult {
use client = new CloudFlareClient(Credentials.CloudFlare.Email, Credentials.CloudFlare.Key)
let! zone = getZoneAsync client
let! records = getRecordsAsync client zone.Id
let! update = updateRecordAsync client zone.Id records
return! decodeResult update
}
It is interfacing with a C# lib that handles all the calls to the CloudFlare API and returns a CloudFlareResult object which has a success flag, a result and an error.
I remapped that type to a Result<'a, string> type:
let decodeResult (r: CloudFlareResult<'a>) =
match r.Success with
| true -> Ok r.Result
| false -> Error r.Errors.[0].Message
And I could write an expression for it (hypothetically since I've been using them but haven't written my own yet), but then I would be happy to have an asyncCloudFlareResult expression, or even an asyncCloudFlareResultOrResult expression, if that makes sense.
I am wondering if there is a mechanism to combine expressions together, the same way FSToolKit does (although I suspect it's just custom code there).
Again, this is a question to learn something, not about the practicality since it would probably add more code than it's worth.
Following Gus' comment, I realized it would be good to illustrate the point with some simpler code:
function DoA : int -> Async<AWSCallResult<int, string>>
function DoB : int -> Async<Result<int, string>>
AWSCallResultAndResult {
let! a = DoA 3
let! b = DoB a
return b
}
in this example I would end up with two types that can take an int and return an error string, but they are different. Both have their expressions so I can chain them as needed.
And the original question is about how these can be combined together.
It's possible to extend CEs with overloads.
The example below makes it possible to use the CustomResult type with a usual result builder.
open FsToolkit.ErrorHandling
type CustomResult<'T, 'TError> =
{ IsError: bool
Error: 'TError
Value: 'T }
type ResultBuilder with
member inline _.Source(result : CustomResult<'T, 'TError>) =
if result.IsError then
Error result.Error
else
Ok result.Value
let computeA () = Ok 42
let computeB () = Ok 23
let computeC () =
{ CustomResult.Error = "oops. This went wrong"
CustomResult.IsError = true
CustomResult.Value = 64 }
let computedResult =
result {
let! a = computeA ()
let! b = computeB ()
let! c = computeC ()
return a + b + c
}
How to do an simple await in F# ?
In C# I have code like this:
await collection.InsertOneAsync(DO);
var r = collection.ReplaceOneAsync((fun d -> d.Id = DO.Id), DO)
So I created a let await = ... to my F# code become more similar with my C# code.
My current F# code is this:
let awaits (t: Threading.Tasks.Task) = t |> Async.AwaitTask |> Async.RunSynchronously
let await (t: Threading.Tasks.Task<'T>) = t |> Async.AwaitTask |> Async.RunSynchronously
let Busca (numero) =
let c = collection.Find(fun d -> d.Numero=numero).ToList()
c
let Insere(DO: DiarioOficial) =
//collection.InsertOneAsync(DO) |> Async.AwaitTask |> Async.RunSynchronously
collection.InsertOneAsync(DO) |> awaits
let Salva (DO: DiarioOficial) =
//let r = collection.ReplaceOneAsync((fun d -> d.Id = DO.Id), DO) |> Async.AwaitTask |> Async.RunSynchronously
let r = collection.ReplaceOneAsync((fun d -> d.Id = DO.Id), DO) |> await
r
I want to have only one definition for await (awaits), but the best I could do is this, because on Insere, type is Task, but on Salva, type is Task<'T>
If i use only the await, I get this compile error:
FS0001 The type 'Threading.Tasks.Task' is not compatible with the type 'Threading.Tasks.Task<'a>'
If I use only the awaits, it compiles, but I lose the return type from the async Task
I want to merge the await and awaits in a single
let await = ...
How can I do this?
In F# we tend to use another syntax. It is described e.g. here: https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/posts/concurrency-async-and-parallel/.
or here: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/fsharp/tutorials/asynchronous-and-concurrent-programming/async
The idea of working with C# Tasks is to "convert" them to async with Async.Await<'T>
You can do it probably another way, but it is the most straightforward.
There are two parts of writing async code in both F# and C#.
You need to mark the method or code block as asynchronous. In C#, this is done using the async keyword. The F# equivalent is to use the async { ... } block (which is an expression, but otherwise, it is similar).
Inside async method or async { .. } block, you can make non-blocking calls. In C#, this is done using await and in F# it is done using let!. Note that this is not just a function call - the compiler handles this in a special way.
F# also uses Async<T> type rather than Task<T>, but those are easy to convert - e.g. using Async.AwaitTask. So, you probably want something like this:
let myAsyncFunction () = async {
let! _ = collection.InsertOneAsync(DO) |> Async.AwaitTask
let r = collection.ReplaceOneAsync((fun d -> d.Id = DO.Id), DO)
// More code goes here
}
I used let! to show the idea, but if you have an asynchronous operation that returns unit, you can also use do!
do! collection.InsertOneAsync(DO) |> Async.AwaitTask
I am trying to learn F# and am in the process of converting some C# code to F#.
I have the following C# method:
public async Task<Foo> GetFooAsync(byte[] content)
{
using (var stream = new MemoryStream(content))
{
return await bar.GetFooAsync(stream);
}
}
Where bar is some private field and GetFooAsync returns a Task<Foo>.
How does this translate to F#?
Here is what I currently have:
member public this.GetFooAsync (content : byte[]) =
use stream = new MemoryStream(content)
this.bar.GetFooAsync(stream)
Which returns a Task.
In F#, asynchrony is represented by the async computation builder, which is not an exact analog of Task, but can generally be used in place of one:
member public this.GetFooAsync (content : byte[]) =
async {
use stream = new MemoryStream(content)
return! this.bar.GetFooAsync(stream) |> Async.AwaitTask
}
|> Async.StartAsTask
If you are converting async/await-intensive C# code to F#, it might get cumbersome because of the difference between F#'s async and Task and the fact that you always have to call Async.AwaitTask
To avoid that you can use FSharpx library, which has a task computation expression.
let tplAsyncMethod p = Task.Run (fun _ -> string p)
// awaiting TPL method inside async computation expression
let asyncResult = async {
let! value1 = tplAsyncMethod 1 |> Async.AwaitTask
let! value2 = tplAsyncMethod 2 |> Async.AwaitTask
return value1 + value2
}
// The same logic using task computation expression
open FSharpx.Task
let taskResult = task {
let! value1 = tplAsyncMethod 1
let! value2 = tplAsyncMethod 2
return value1 + value2
}
The result of asyncResult is Async<string> and the result of taskResult is Task<string>.
I am new to functional programming in general and started learning F# recently. I wanted to use an async workflow returning Async<'U option> to pick an item in a Sequence. I find a nice Seq.pick function, but I am not sure how I could use that with an async workflow.
If that is not possible, is there another alternative to using an imperative style program to pick the item from the list. The following is a modified variation of my program. Any feedback is highly appreciated.
let run = async {
while not stopped do
use! resource = acquireResourceLockAsync
let! items = fetchItemsAsync 5
let! item = Seq.pick returnIfLocked items
let! status = performTaskAsync item
do! updateStatusAsync status
do! Async.Sleep 1000
}
Thanks in anticipation.
EDIT: Updated my question based on the answer by jpalmer. I noticed both Seq.filter and Seq.pick earlier and decided that Seq.pick will meet my need better, as I need the first item that I am able to lock. However, I forgot to change the return value of my function - instead of returning true, it should return Some(item). Now with that update, is there an elegant way to approach this without 1) blocking a thread to convert Async<'U option> to 'U and 2) resorting to an imperative style looping?
I am unclear exactly what you are trying to do. If you want to convert from Async<'T> to 'T non-blocking, then you want to use let! in an async workflow. So the seq-like logic probably needs to be written as its own loop, as suggested below. If that doesn't help, then perhaps share more code, especially the intended types of items/item/returnIfLocked, as I'm unclear what's async in your example.
let asyncPick f (s:seq<_>) =
async {
use e = s.GetEnumerator()
let r = ref None
while Option.isNone(!r) && e.MoveNext() do
let! x = f e.Current
r := x
match !r with
| Some z -> return z
| None -> return failwith "no matching item found"
}
let chooser ax =
async {
let! x = ax
if x%3 = 0 then
return Some x
else
return None
}
let s = seq { for i in 1..10 do yield async { return i } }
let main() =
async {
let! firstChosen = s |> asyncPick chooser
return firstChosen
}
|> Async.RunSynchronously
|> printfn "%d"
main()
It is important to look at the signature of the function you are using,
Seq.pick expects a function which returns option<'t>, you want to use Seq.Filter which takes a function which returns a bool.
You will still have another problem though in that you have Async<bool> - you will need to convert that to a normal bool, but you could do this inside your 'Seq.Filter' function