Benjamin (Inglor) Gruenbaum wrote:
Of course this example is contrived! It's the simplest example I could
think of. I do think it stands for every example of any iterator that
takes any input from `.send` or `.throw`. I have plenty of other
contrived examples (implementing `fork` like this by using generators
for coroutines with promises is at least mildly cool).
I <3 fork, Unix kid here. Still, agree here:
That said I absolutely agree that more practical examples are required
in order to make this already way-powerful two way protocol into
something even more complicated.
Another consideration beyond just the needs-justification language
power-up -- the implementation burden goes up too. You're talking about
cloning an activation. Easy in the unoptimized world of generators
today, not so much in the future.
It may be worth it, but we need to feel the "back-pressure" from
developers using generators, first.
Can developers use conventions and APIs to implement `clone` today? I.e.,
Object.defineProperty(function*(){}.prototype.__proto__, 'clone',
{value: XXX, writable: true, configurable: true, enumerable: false});
What would have to go in the XXX that's self-hostable, and how would
generators that participate have to be written?
/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
