Re: What is this "Beman Project Development"?

From: Vinnie Falco (vinnie.falco_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-05-10 08:31:32

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 12:22 AM Arno Schoedl via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Is there a way to avoid std::for_each having to be a coroutine?
>

No. This blog post elegantly relates the problem with this design (I think).

https://journal.stuffwithstuff.com/2015/02/01/what-color-is-your-function/

The viral nature of co_await was understood in 2015 and described in
P0158R0:

https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/p0158r0.html

Most of the problems predicted in P0158R0 before coroutines made it into
the standard are now being reported independently by users. As I noted in
my previous replies, there is no process in WG21 which revisits major
language decisions to learn from mistakes. In fact... I remember when the
author was lobbying hard for coroutines he was giving talks, going to
lunches and dinners, posting on reddit, posting on the Official C++
Language Slack Workspace, hanging out in Discord, and so on. But after
coroutines made it into the standard he disappeared faster than my ex-wife
after I declared bankruptcy. He unlocked the achievement I suppose.

If it sounds like I'm picking on the author, I am not. If he didn't do it,
someone else would have. The WG21 process incentivizes this behavior. Land
a high-profile feature desired by a corporate sponsor, and game over. It
isn't a coincidence that C++ coroutines harmonize perfectly with their C#
equivalent (Microsoft). Here's a blog post from a user describing their
experience. If you look at items 1, 2, and 3 under 'Conclusion' you can see
that this was exactly predicted in opposition papers pre-acceptance.

Thanks