On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 17:31:31 UTC, David Nadlinger
wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 at 16:56:36 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
I wasn't aware of any. Someone suggested moving Generator to
a separate module and I explained why this isn't advisable.
If there are other issues, I would appreciate it if someone
would restate them.
1) There is still Martin's point that Boost.Coroutine seems to
use a different design. I haven't had a look at it in any
detail, but I think it would be good to briefly comment on why
their choices would not be a good fit for us. After all, one
would suspect that they started out with vaguely similar design
space restrictions and goals.
I thought I did :-) Generator is a limited version of a
coroutine, which I created both in response to some features in
other languages like Go and because of something that came up
during Chuck Allison's talk at the conference this year. It's
possible that Boost-style coroutines will be added later and
Generator will be made a special case of these, but that should
not affect the current API. I think it still has merit as a
standalone thing, as Boost-style coroutines won't work as an
input range (which is the point of Generators).
2) There are still a couple of typos in the docs, and at least
one code quality suggestion (`auto ref`). Just scroll through
the non-outdated GitHub comments.
I must have missed this. I'll check.
