Re: [boost] [coroutine2] Difference between coroutine and coroutine2

23 Jun 2015

      On June 22, 2015 1:13:54 PM EDT, "Vicente J. Botet Escriba"  wrote:
...
...
On June 22, 2015 4:41:05 AM EDT, Oliver Kowalke
 wrote:
...
2015-06-22 10:29 GMT+02:00 Rob Stewart :
...
If there's only one kind of coroutine in coroutine2, why isn't it
just
named "coroutine"?
asymmetric_coroutine<> describes the coroutine type (assymetric
transfer of
execution control),
With only one kind, the documentation already describes how it
behaves. Having asymmetric_coroutine suggests other variations are
expected in the future.
...
but coroutine.hpp contains:
template< typename T >
using coroutine = asymmetric_coroutine< T >;
so you could use coroutine<> if desired.
If you think asymmetric_coroutine is necessary, and clearly I do
not, you should reverse those. That is, asymmetric_coroutine should be
Le 22/06/15 11:10, Rob Stewart a écrit :
the alias.
...
I don't agree. asymmetric_coroutine is the correct term. This let us
to add again symmetric_coroutine if the need comeback.
If that must remain a possibility, then there should be no "coroutine" alias and the header should be asymmetric_coroutine.hpp.

If symmetric_coroutine was removed for good reason, does that reason not preclude its return? I don't have that answer. I'm just inferring from the result.

___
Rob

(Sent from my portable computation engine)