Update functions.php

[lav45]

Skip delay if timeout is equels 0.0

[bwoebi]

\Amp\delay(0); is an intentional feature to force the fiber to continue in the next event-loop tick.

So, no, we don't want to skip this. ... Especially not in 3.x, because it would be a breaking change :-/

Even though I agree, a separate function for "schedule in next tick" rather than \Amp\delay(0) would have been good, but too late now.

[trowski]

@bwoebi FYI, Amp\async(fn () => doSomething()) effectively will schedule something in the next tick. Amp\delay(0) is a nice way of pausing the current fiber for a tick, something which I generally only need to do in tests anyway.

[bwoebi]

@trowski async runs after all current outstanding microtasks, not next event-loop tick. awaitOutstandingMicrotasks() and awaitEventloopTick() would be sort of nice to have sometimes, explicitly.

[trowski]

Yes, though I find it rare to need to make such a distinction. I suppose if you're dealing with event-loop callback timing in a test that timing is going to matter. In that case, there's also EventLoop::defer(), which I guess is actually what I should have suggested over Amp\async().

[xpader]

I think there is no reason to change this.