Context
Suppose I want to download 300 images in the background using Swift Concurrency. I'd like two things:
- As much parallelism as possible.
- My caller to receive each image as it's downloaded, rather than waiting for all of them to finish.
Approach:
TaskGroup
has many advantages: great parallelism, very cheap child tasks, and cancellation. But it does not return until all 300 child tasks have finished.
AsyncStream
lets me return images as they're downloaded, but has no parallelism on its own—downloads happen one at a time, in sequence.
Question:
What I'd like to do is wrap a TaskGroup
with an AsyncStream
, like this:
let stream = AsyncStream(NSImage.self) { continuation in
_ = await withTaskGroup(of: NSImage.self, returning: [NSImage].self) { taskGroup in
let imageURLs: [URL] = ... // array of 300 URLs to download
for imageURL in imageURLs {
taskGroup.addTask { await downloadImage(url: imageURL) }
}
for await result in taskGroup {
continuation.yield(result)
}
continuation.finish()
return []
}
}
But AsyncStream
can't take an async
closure. So what's the best way to achieve this behavior with Swift Concurrency?
The idea is that you would bridge from the synchronous context of
AsyncStream
to Swift concurrency by creating aTask
for the asynchronous work. Also remember to add anonTermination
closure so that it will respond to the cancelation of theAsyncStream
:Obviously, since you are doing all of these network requests concurrently, you must recognize that these will likely not finish in the order corresponding to the original array of URLs.
So, you might return a tuple of the original URL and the resulting image:
Or perhaps an index number and the image: