On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Oliver Kowalke wrote:

I've uploaded two re-factored versions - I think most of the suggestions from the review are implemented (namespace is not corrected and documentation not updated yet).

1.) http://ok73.ok.funpic.de/**boost-coroutine-self.ziphttp://ok73.ok.funpic.de/boost-coroutine-self.zip 2.) http://ok73.ok.funpic.de/**boost-coroutine-coro.ziphttp://ok73.ok.funpic.de/boost-coroutine-coro.zip

Version 1) requires that coroutine-fn has only one argument == coroutine<>::self_t. Other arguments are accessed via coroutine<>::self_t::get< int >() and results via coroutine<>::get(). interface provides input/output iterators.

typedef coroutine< int( int, int> > coro_t; int fn( coro_t::self_t & c) { int x = c.get< 0 >(); int y = c.get< 1 >(); c.yield( x +y); ... } coro_t coro( fn); int res = c( 3, 7).get();

Version 2) requires that coroutine-fn has only one argument too == coroutine<> with inverted signature. Other arguments are access via coroutine<>::get(). interface provides input/output iterators.

typedef coroutine< int( int, int> > coro_t; int fn( coroutine< tuple< int, int >( int) & c) { int x = c.get().get< 0 >(); int y = c.get().get< 1 >(); c( x +y); ... } coro_t coro( fn); int res = c( 3, 7).get();

Both implementations are not optimized - I think we should get a small and clean interface first. Comments?

FWIW, I (presently) prefer the syntax and symmetry in 2). Maybe for ease-of-use you can also submit a macro to Boost.Fusion that "unpacks and initializes" the arguments into local variables, something that allows you to do BOOST_FUSION_UNPACK( ( int x ) ( int y ), c.get() ) // Or maybe it could work with just "c"? Or maybe "c.result()" would be better? I have such a macro implemented, so could help with such a feature. It's basically an extension of tie'ing. It looks like there's still a question on when the coroutine function body is entered: upon construction of the coroutine object or upon the first call? Seems like the natural thing would be upon the first call, separate from the coroutine construction, but...yeah I admit I don't fully grasp the pros and cons of each convention. And this seems sufficiently important to get right. Sorry, that's probably not very helpful :) - Jeff