I don't see the need for a new keyword. An attribute should be fine
sub foo : coroutine { }
Would do quite well. It would fit with the :method attribute, and
a possible :lvalue attribute.
Anyway, isn't what you are proposing more of a generator/sink rather
than a coroutine? I understood a coroutine to be a set of mutual
calling functions/procedures.
I also see this as more appropriate to the -language group.
Hmm, would a
return :here EXPR
handle the resumption issues?
<chaim>
PRL> =head1 DESCRIPTION
PRL> This proposal introduces a new keyword to perl, "co", as a complement
PRL> to "sub". A subroutine is defined thusly:
PRL> co foo { ... }
PRL> Coroutines can also be closures:
PRL> my $x = co { ... }
PRL> Unlike coroutines as defined by Knuth, and implemented in laguages
PRL> such as Simula or Python, perl does not have an
PRL> explicit "resume" call for invoking coroutines. Instead, perl uses a
PRL> mechanism that perl programmers are already familiar with: pipes.
PRL> Note that these are intra-process pipes, and would be implemented
PRL> differently than kernel pipes.
PRL> Coroutines are identified by a prefixed vertical bar. To invoke a
PRL> coroutine, you write data to or read data from it.
PRL> $y = <|foo>;
PRL> print |$x "hello, world\n";
--
Chaim Frenkel Nonlinear Knowledge, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-718-236-0183
