Re: Coroutines

[Dustin Laurence <dustin at laurences dot net>]

On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 02:05:13PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2006, at 1:41 PM, Dustin Laurence wrote:
> >I'm pretty sure this is stepping into deep quicksand
> 
> No, just hard work.  It is only quicksand, if you start, but never  
> finish.

It's quicksand if it turns out to vastly exceed the time allotted.
Especially if the estimated time to completion not only increases as
time goes on but diverges. :-)

> The mechanism I might favor would be to handle all the fun inside the  
> language front end.... 
> this saves you from having to fight against them, but it does have  
> limitations (no full and complete interoperability with C).

Interoperability is good, but you have a point.

> If every language were going to have the feature, then, moving it  
> down into the mid-end or back-end might make sense, but I don't think  
> it does in this case.

Personally, I'd like, and use, decent coroutines in C.  But perhaps I am
the only one.

> I wouldn't start with pthreads I don't think.

That was my thought--I played with it some but I intended it as a bit of
threads practice.  Using threads to emulate a synchronous construct just
seems *wrong.*

Dustin

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature