12. 性能对比

__procedure
( __sequential
  ( __wait(1)
  , __wait(2)
  , __wait(3)
  , __wait(4)
  , __wait(5)
  , __wait(6))
  , __wait(7))
  , __finally
    ( __sequential
      ( __wait(7)
      , __wait(8)
      , __wait(9)
      , __wait(1)))
) a;

1.x:

1225 ns

2.0:

116 ns

using ProcedureAction1 =
  __procedure(
    __wait(1),
    __finally(__asyn(AsyncAction2)));

using ProcedureAction2 =
  __procedure(
    __wait(2),
    __finally(__asyn(AsyncAction1)));

using Concurrent =
   __concurrent(
     ProcedureAction1,
     ProcedureAction2);

1.x:

2007 ns

2.0:

108 ns

如果我们再增加一个并发：

using ProcedureAction3 =
   __procedure(
      __wait(3),
      __finally(__asyn(AsyncAction4)));

using Concurrent2 =
  __concurrent(
    ProcedureAction1,
    ProcedureAction2,
    ProcedureAction3);

1.x:

3338 ns

2.0:

199 ns

如果我们将之前的顺序过程和并发过程混合在一起：

using Proc = __procedure
   ( __sequential
       ( __wait(1)
       , __wait(2)
       , __wait(3)
       , __wait(4)
       , __wait(5)
       , __wait(6)
       , Concurrent2),
     __finally(__sequential(__wait(7), __wait(8), __wait(9)))
   );

1.x:

5402 ns

2.0:

338 ns