Java Equivalent of C# async/await?
Solution 1:
No, there isn't any equivalent of async/await in Java - or even in C# before v5.
It's a fairly complex language feature to build a state machine behind the scenes.
There's relatively little language support for asynchrony/concurrency in Java, but the java.util.concurrent
package contains a lot of useful classes around this. (Not quite equivalent to the Task Parallel Library, but the closest approximation to it.)
Solution 2:
The await
uses a continuation to execute additional code when the asynchronous operation completes (client.GetStringAsync(...)
).
So, as the most close approximation I would use a CompletableFuture<T>
(the Java 8 equivalent to .net Task<TResult>
) based solution to process the Http request asynchronously.
UPDATED on 25-05-2016 to AsyncHttpClient v.2 released on Abril 13th of 2016:
So the Java 8 equivalent to the OP example of AccessTheWebAsync()
is the following:
CompletableFuture<Integer> AccessTheWebAsync()
{
AsyncHttpClient asyncHttpClient = new DefaultAsyncHttpClient();
return asyncHttpClient
.prepareGet("http://msdn.microsoft.com")
.execute()
.toCompletableFuture()
.thenApply(Response::getResponseBody)
.thenApply(String::length);
}
This usage was taken from the answer to How do I get a CompletableFuture from an Async Http Client request?
and which is according to the new API provided in version 2 of AsyncHttpClient released on Abril 13th of 2016, that has already intrinsic support for CompletableFuture<T>
.
Original answer using version 1 of AsyncHttpClient:
To that end we have two possible approaches:
the first one uses non-blocking IO and I call it
AccessTheWebAsyncNio
. Yet, because theAsyncCompletionHandler
is an abstract class (instead of a functional interface) we cannot pass a lambda as argument. So it incurs in inevitable verbosity due to the syntax of anonymous classes. However, this solution is the most close to the execution flow of the given C# example.the second one is slightly less verbose however it will submit a new Task that ultimately will block a thread on
f.get()
until the response is complete.
First approach, more verbose but non-blocking:
static CompletableFuture<Integer> AccessTheWebAsyncNio(){
final AsyncHttpClient asyncHttpClient = new AsyncHttpClient();
final CompletableFuture<Integer> promise = new CompletableFuture<>();
asyncHttpClient
.prepareGet("https://msdn.microsoft.com")
.execute(new AsyncCompletionHandler<Response>(){
@Override
public Response onCompleted(Response resp) throws Exception {
promise.complete(resp.getResponseBody().length());
return resp;
}
});
return promise;
}
Second approach less verbose but blocking a thread:
static CompletableFuture<Integer> AccessTheWebAsync(){
try(AsyncHttpClient asyncHttpClient = new AsyncHttpClient()){
Future<Response> f = asyncHttpClient
.prepareGet("https://msdn.microsoft.com")
.execute();
return CompletableFuture.supplyAsync(
() -> return f.join().getResponseBody().length());
}
}
Solution 3:
Check out ea-async which does Java bytecode rewriting to simulate async/await pretty nicely. Per their readme: "It is heavily inspired by Async-Await on the .NET CLR"
Solution 4:
async and await are syntactic sugars. The essence of async and await is state machine. The compiler will transform your async/await code into a state machine.
At the same time, in order for async/await to be really practicable in real projects, we need to have lots of Async I/O library functions already in place. For C#, most original synchronized I/O functions has an alternative Async version. The reason we need these Async functions is because in most cases, your own async/await code will boil down to some library Async method.
The Async version library functions in C# is kind of like the AsynchronousChannel concept in Java. For example, we have AsynchronousFileChannel.read which can either return a Future or execute a callback after the read operation is done. But it’s not exactly the same. All C# Async functions return Tasks (similar to Future but more powerful than Future).
So let’s say Java do support async/await, and we write some code like this:
public static async Future<Byte> readFirstByteAsync(String filePath) {
Path path = Paths.get(filePath);
AsynchronousFileChannel channel = AsynchronousFileChannel.open(path);
ByteBuffer buffer = ByteBuffer.allocate(100_000);
await channel.read(buffer, 0, buffer, this);
return buffer.get(0);
}
Then I would imagine the compiler will transform the original async/await code into something like this:
public static Future<Byte> readFirstByteAsync(String filePath) {
CompletableFuture<Byte> result = new CompletableFuture<Byte>();
AsyncHandler ah = new AsyncHandler(result, filePath);
ah.completed(null, null);
return result;
}
And here is the implementation for AsyncHandler:
class AsyncHandler implements CompletionHandler<Integer, ByteBuffer>
{
CompletableFuture<Byte> future;
int state;
String filePath;
public AsyncHandler(CompletableFuture<Byte> future, String filePath)
{
this.future = future;
this.state = 0;
this.filePath = filePath;
}
@Override
public void completed(Integer arg0, ByteBuffer arg1) {
try {
if (state == 0) {
state = 1;
Path path = Paths.get(filePath);
AsynchronousFileChannel channel = AsynchronousFileChannel.open(path);
ByteBuffer buffer = ByteBuffer.allocate(100_000);
channel.read(buffer, 0, buffer, this);
return;
} else {
Byte ret = arg1.get(0);
future.complete(ret);
}
} catch (Exception e) {
future.completeExceptionally(e);
}
}
@Override
public void failed(Throwable arg0, ByteBuffer arg1) {
future.completeExceptionally(arg0);
}
}