Re: [Boost-users] Limitations of BOOST_COROUTINES_V2 (pass by reference)

4 Jul 2014


      2014-07-04 22:27 GMT+08:00 Nat Goodspeed :
...
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 2:28 AM, Mueller-Roemer, Johannes Sebastian
 wrote:
...
Sorry for the misunderstanding, the part in the parentheses was meant to
point out that I currently do not require bidirectional data flow, so I
don't have a use case for that ;)
I do understand that. My question was directed more to the mailing
list in general. I'm content with unidrectional coroutine data flow
until someone surfaces a compelling use case for bidirectional.
...
The auto& is not the issue and works just fine in the
BOOST_COROUTINES_V1 case (and if it were, it would be a compiler bug as
auto& must match std::string const &).
Could it be a compiler bug anyway? The following works fine with gcc 4.2:
#include 
#include <iostream>
void coro_fn(boost::coroutines::coroutine::push_type&
sink)
{
    sink("Hello world!\n");
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    boost::coroutines::coroutine::pull_type
coro(coro_fn);
    std::cout << coro.get() << std::endl;
    return 0;
}
Call coro() and you'll see the error.
Seems that the specializations of pull_coroutine_base
and pull_coroutine_object for R& is unnecessary and erroneous.

Re: [Boost-users] Limitations of BOOST_COROUTINES_V2 (pass by reference)

TONGARI J