Do something like withManager

[ndmitchell]

It seems a little weird that you have a creation function (newManager) and a closing function (closeManager), but no function that lets me do something using the with pattern. I'm not sure I get why withManager has to die? Is closeManager no longer necessary? If not, withManager seems like it has value, even if @merijn might not want to be using it in his example.

From #125 originally.

[snoyberg]

That's a good point: we should deprecate closeManager too. The point is that the lifetime of the Manager is handled automatically, and manually closing things out is not necessary. This is similar to how in resource-pool, you can create a pool but not destroy one.

[ndmitchell]

That's fine then - I suggest doing it immediately and making clear in the docs. Perhaps rewrite withManager to not call closeManager, since one way of fixing deprecated warnings is to inline the function that is deprecated and refactor from there (that's what I always do).

[snoyberg]

Agreed, that makes sense. Mind looking at 32b02a7 before I release?

[ndmitchell]

I've made a bunch of line notes.

[ndmitchell]

All looks good now. Still conceptually weird to see you suggesting people rely on the GC for resource finalisation :)

[snoyberg]

True, it is quite different from what I typically recommend. If you look at the internals of how this all works, it will make a lot more sense: the manager puts itself to sleep when unused, wakes up when used again, and when all references disappear, is garbage collected. You can manually kill it early, but that's more likely to trigger a bug than anything else.

Alright, releasing the new version.