We should also specify a representation for coroutine_handle<>. On 11 February 2016 at 11:06, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11 February 2016 at 07:43, David Vandevoorde <[email protected]> wrote: > >> A proposal for coroutine support is making its way through the C++ >> committee. Here is the latest public document: >> >> >> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/p0057r1.pdf >> >> It includes a new “operator co_await” that will require mangling when >> supported. >> >> How about reserving the operator code “aw” for it? >> >> I.e., once standardized or TS'd, we’d add a production to <operator-name>: >> >> <operator-name> ::= nw # new >> ... >> ::= aw # co_await (unary) >> ... > > > I agree, see > http://sourcerytools.com/pipermail/cxx-abi-dev/2015-October/002868.html > =) >
_______________________________________________ cxx-abi-dev mailing list [email protected] http://sourcerytools.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cxx-abi-dev
