Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [WG21 mailing] N4453 Resumable expressions
From: Avi Kivity (avi_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-04-15 15:26:59

On 04/15/2015 04:27 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> I'm finding Chris' paper on resumable expressions instead of compiler
> magic created resumable functions awfully compelling:
> I essentially proposed the same with my functionally composed
> constexpr basic_future design some months ago.

Regarding that, you may be interested in a similar effort, seatar [1],
with very lightweight thread-unsafe futures and continuations (future<>
size is 16 bytes) with multi-core utilization provided by explicit

> Would anyone else like to comment on this library based instead of
> compiler based resumable execution? I'm not against some compiler
> support for resumable execution, but I am finding the await based
> proposal highly problematic, and Chris does an excellent job in
> summarising my own thoughts on what's wrong with it.

[1], see core/future.hh

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at