Re: [boost] [Review.Coroutine] Some comments

Subject: Re: [boost] [Review.Coroutine] Some comments
From: Oliver Kowalke (oliver.kowalke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-09-08 12:48:35

Am 08.09.2012 16:25, schrieb Vicente J. Botet Escriba:
>>>>
>>>> On solution could be to make coroutine non-copyable,
>>>
>>> Is coroutine copyable?
>> moveable-only - I mean to derive from boost::noncopyable
> I'm lost. How this can help here?

I was thinking about to make coroutine deriving from boost::noncopyable 
and not moveable-only.
Then I could refactor coroutine that it does not need to allocate memory 
for inner classes.
The user can decide if the coroutine instance is allocated on the stack 
or in the freestore and which technique is used.

But I think I've a solution to accept and hold an allocator in coroutine

>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> * Parameters and move semantics. Could the signature parameters be 
>>>>> rvalue references?
>>>>>
>>>>>    R  operator()(A0  a0,  ...,  A9  a9);
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm asking this because I think that Boost.Tuple has not 
>>>>> implemented yet move semantics.
>>>> boost::tuple does not handle moveable-only objects - so it will not 
>>>> work. we've to wiat until the supprot is added to boost::tuple.
>>>>
>>> Have you take a look at the boost::fusion::tuple move C++11 evolution?
>> I'll take a look into the docu
> I don't know when these should be released, but I know they are 
> working on it. In any case I expect that boost::fusion::tuple will 
> manage with move semantics one day, but to my knowledge no body is 
> working on boost::tuple. Maybe someone has fresh infos.
>
OK

regards,
Oliver