Change IAsyncResult APIs in System.Net.Sockets to wrap Task APIs

[geoffkizer]

We should change all the old IAsyncResult APIs in System.Net.Sockets to simply wrap the equivalent Task APIs, as we do in general.

Unfortunately, some of the current Task APIs actually use these IAsyncResult APIs. There is planned work to change this.

Specifically, we should do this for the following Socket APIs:

• [Begin/End]Connect -- done in Rewrite Socket.ConnectAsync for DNS with async/await #43661
• [Begin/End]Accept -- done in refactor old APM [Begin/End]Accept methods on top of Task APIs, and enable for Unix as well #51212
• [Begin/End]Send -- done in Reimplement Socket.Begin/EndSend/Receive on Send/ReceiveAsync #43886
• [Begin/End]Receive -- done in Reimplement Socket.Begin/EndSend/Receive on Send/ReceiveAsync #43886
• [Begin/End]SendTo -- blocked on Sockets: Reimplement remaining Task-based async methods using SocketAsyncEventArgs  #41502
• [Begin/End]ReceiveFrom -- blocked on Sockets: Reimplement remaining Task-based async methods using SocketAsyncEventArgs  #41502
• [Begin/End]ReceiveMessageFrom -- blocked on Sockets: Reimplement remaining Task-based async methods using SocketAsyncEventArgs  #41502
• [Begin/End]SendFile -- blocked on Add Task-based async API for Socket.SendFile #42591
• [Begin/End]Disconnect -- done in add Task-based DisconnectAsync and refactor APM methods on top of it #51213

And these UdpClient APIs:

- [ ] [Begin/End]Send
- [ ] [Begin/End]Receive

EDIT (by @antonfirsov )

As per #43845 (comment), we don't need to do anything with UdpClient.

• We need to fix Socket.Begin*** methods wrapping Task variants do not throw SocketExceptions synchronously #47905 Update API docs: Remove SokcetException from Begin*** methods for 6.0 dotnet-api-docs#6658

[ghost]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/ncl
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[antonfirsov]

And these UdpClient APIs: [...]

@geoffkizer I'm not sure what do you mean by those work items. UdpClient's [Begin/End][Receive/Send] methods are thin wrappers over the Socket counterparts. You say it's worth to refactor them to wrap their own Task-based methods instead?

[geoffkizer]

UdpClient's [Begin/End][Receive/Send] methods are thin wrappers over the Socket counterparts. You say it's worth to refactor them to wrap their own Task-based methods instead?

No, you're right, I don't think we actually need to refactor these. I probably didn't look closely at what they do when I added them to the list.

[karelz]

Seems to be finished, closing.