This repository was archived by the owner on Apr 8, 2020. It is now read-only.
Repository navigation
This repository was archived by the owner on Apr 8, 2020. It is now read-only.
Should Html.PrimeCache be named Html.PrimeCacheAsync? #246
Description
MVC APIs that return Task/Task<T> have the Async suffix, e.g. Html.PartialAsync.
For consistency with MVC APIs and as an indicator to developers that they should @await the result, shouldn't Html.PrimeCache be named Html.PrimeCacheAsync?
Activity
SteveSandersonMS commentedon Aug 8, 2016
Yes, I think you're right! Will add that as a new overload and will mark the old one as obsolete.
justinvp commentedon Aug 8, 2016
While you're at it, maybe the new overload should return
Task<IHtmlContent>instead ofTask<HtmlString>(likeHtml.PartialAsync), which would allow the results to be written to aTextWriterinstead of having to concatenate/format/allocate a (potentially large) string to return withHtmlString?HtmlStringitself implementsIHtmlContentso the existing implementation could remain as-is for now; returningTask<IHtmlContent>leaves the door open to perf improvements in the future.justinvp commentedon Aug 8, 2016
(To give you an idea, I prototyped some potential changes to the existing implementation earlier this weekend: 4c7bdcf)
SteveSandersonMS commentedon Aug 16, 2016
Implemented. As per your suggestion, also changed the return type to
Task<IHtmlContent>. Currently it's still usingHtmlStringbut could change to a custom less-allocatey alternative like your prototype in the future.Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/dev' into dev