From: Giovanni P. Deretta (gpderetta_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-06 13:52:51
Xi Wang wrote:
> On 5/6/06, Giovanni P. Deretta <gpderetta_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> [ some explaination here ]
> Got it. Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation :-)
> So the return value (tuple) of a call to a yield in the coroutine body is
> the parameters of the subsequent invocation to the coroutine object, right?
> The "return" I mentioned was just to guide the compiler to check the return
> rather than to exit the function (of course it should not). More clearly,
> suppose real_yield is a global yield function, not type-safe.
> #define yield(x) \
> if (FALSE) return x; \
> This macro would help to check the return type, and "return x" is never
> However, in this case, the return value (tuple) of real_yield could not be
> So just forget it:-)
Also this wouldn't work if yield is invoked from a subroutine called
from a coroutine. Still the trick is interesting. I didn't understand it
the first time you proposed it.
Btw, IF the coroutine body is actually a function object AND there is
only one operator() for that object AND yield is only called from
operator() (and not from any other subroutine), may be something like
this could work (i did not try it):
#define yield(x) \
(real_yeld is a global template function that will chose its arguments
and return type according to the signature of the first function
parameter that is passed to it)
If operator() is overloaded the compiler will complain that address_of
call is ambiguous. If yield is called from a free function it will
complain that 'this' cannot be found. If yield is called from a functor
called from the coroutine body, things can go very very badly.
This macro can break in so many ways that it is not fun...
Thanks again for the feedback.
-- Giovanni P. Deretta
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk