Proposal: Control.Concurrent.Async

Simon Marlow marlowsd at
Fri Jun 15 15:31:03 CEST 2012

On 14/06/2012 22:54, Lauri Alanko wrote:
> Quoting "Simon Marlow" <marlowsd at>:
>> Naming is obviously up for discussion too.
> I feel that "Async" is a bit too generic and doesn't very precisely
> characterize this particular construct. How about "Future", as similar
> things are called in e.g. Alice
> <> and Java
> <>?

"Future" evokes notions of parallelism for me, rather than concurrency. 
  I think the term is more often used in a parallel setting.

There's a precedent for using 'async' for concurrency: see the new C# 
and F# async extensions:

But naming is hard, and if everyone wanted to use "future" instead I 
wouldn't object very strongly.


More information about the Libraries mailing list