On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 7:11 PM chuanqi.xcq via Gcc wrote:
>
> Hi,
> We're discussing to implement `-fno-coroutines` in clang so that we can
> disable the coroutine feature with C++ standard higher than 20.
> A full discussion can be found here: https://reviews.llvm.org
Hi,
We're discussing to implement `-fno-coroutines` in clang so that we can
disable the coroutine feature with C++ standard higher than 20.
A full discussion can be found here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D156247. A major
motivation for us to do this is to keep consistency with GCC.
Howeve
t;>> On 26 Jul 2019, at 10:19, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>
>>>>> C++ coroutines are stackless. I don't think any new low-level
>>> run-time
>>>>> support will be needed.
>>>>
>>>> correct, C++20 coroutines and threading
* Richard Biener:
> On August 20, 2019 5:19:33 PM GMT+02:00, Nathan Sidwell
> wrote:
>>On 7/26/19 6:03 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>> Hello Sebastian,
>>>
>>>> On 26 Jul 2019, at 10:19, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>>>> C++ coroutine
On August 20, 2019 5:19:33 PM GMT+02:00, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>On 7/26/19 6:03 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> Hello Sebastian,
>>
>>> On 26 Jul 2019, at 10:19, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
>>> C++ coroutines are stackless. I don't think any new low-l
On 7/26/19 6:03 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
Hello Sebastian,
On 26 Jul 2019, at 10:19, Florian Weimer wrote:
C++ coroutines are stackless. I don't think any new low-level run-time
support will be needed.
correct, C++20 coroutines and threading mechanisms are orthogonal
facilities; on
;> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> clang and VS2017 already support the Coroutines TS extensions.
>>>>> For which gcc release is going to be foreseen the support for the
>>>>> Coroutines TS extension?
>>>>
>>>> This has be
* Sebastian Huber:
> Hello,
>
> On 06/06/2018 08:33, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> On 06/04/2018 07:36 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> On 4 June 2018 at 18:32, Marco Ippolito wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> clang and VS2017 already support the C
Hello,
On 06/06/2018 08:33, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 06/04/2018 07:36 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 4 June 2018 at 18:32, Marco Ippolito wrote:
Hi all,
clang and VS2017 already support the Coroutines TS extensions.
For which gcc release is going to be foreseen the support for the
Coroutines
On 06/04/2018 07:36 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 4 June 2018 at 18:32, Marco Ippolito wrote:
Hi all,
clang and VS2017 already support the Coroutines TS extensions.
For which gcc release is going to be foreseen the support for the
Coroutines TS extension?
This has been discussed recently
On 4 June 2018 at 18:32, Marco Ippolito wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> clang and VS2017 already support the Coroutines TS extensions.
> For which gcc release is going to be foreseen the support for the
> Coroutines TS extension?
This has been discussed recently, search the mailing li
Hi all,
clang and VS2017 already support the Coroutines TS extensions.
For which gcc release is going to be foreseen the support for the
Coroutines TS extension?
Looking forward to your kind feedback about this extremely important aspect
of gcc.
Marco
On 6 January 2018 at 10:07, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> Related, it looks like C++20 might offer them. Also see
That's not decided yet.
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2017/n4649.pdf.
Yes, that's the TS that people are asking to be supported.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 10/16/2017 07:06 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> On 16 October 2017 at 08:25, Ramón García wrote:
>>>
>>> ping
>>
>>
>> As previously stated, nobody is working on it.
>
>
> Not because nobody cares, but because of lack of time against hi
king on C++ Modules, which is
very nice (and, IMHO, a higher priority than Coroutines).
I realise it is very difficult to be sure of what features will be ready
and working, and that the gcc developers have more than enough on their
"things to do" lists. It must be particularly
On 10/16/2017 07:06 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 16 October 2017 at 08:25, Ramón García wrote:
ping
As previously stated, nobody is working on it.
Not because nobody cares, but because of lack of time against higher
priority things.
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
o reply to mailing list)
>>
>> Xi Ruoyao misses completely the point!
>>
>> The amount of error prone boilerplate code, that the programmer would
>> have to write, is huge. See examples in the excellent presentation
>> "C++ coroutines: a negative overhead ab
presentation
> "C++ coroutines: a negative overhead abstraction"
> https://www.slideshare.net/SergeyPlatonov/gor-nishanov-c-coroutines-a-negative-overhead-abstraction
> Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fu0gx-xseY
>
> What one can have with a coroutine library, a
(repeated, forgot to reply to mailing list)
Xi Ruoyao misses completely the point!
The amount of error prone boilerplate code, that the programmer would
have to write, is huge. See examples in the excellent presentation
"C++ coroutines: a negative overhead abstraction"
https://www.slid
See the thread on gcc-help:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2017-08/msg00045.html
On 19 August 2017 at 14:09, Ramón García wrote:
> ping.
>
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Ramón García
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Please consider supporting the Coroutines TS
ping.
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Ramón García wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Please consider supporting the Coroutines TS in GNU C++.
>
> It is really important to make asynchronous programming usable.
>
> Modern programs should be scalable to use the performance of multicore
&g
Hello,
Please consider supporting the Coroutines TS in GNU C++.
It is really important to make asynchronous programming usable.
Modern programs should be scalable to use the performance of multicore
processors. Stackless coroutines allow the programmer to scale to
millions of asynchronous
Ross Ridge wrote:
>Hmm? I don't see how the "Lua-style" coroutines you're looking are any
>lightweight than what Maurizio Vitale is looking for. They're actually
>more heavyweight because you need to implement some method of returning
>values to the "cor
On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 11:10:14PM -0400, Ross Ridge wrote:
> Dustin Laurence wrote:
> >Yeah, though even that is more heavyweight than coroutines, so your job
> >is harder than mine.
>
> Hmm? I don't see how the "Lua-style" coroutines you're looking
Maurizio Vitale wrote:
> I'm looking at the very same problem, hoping to get very lightweight
> user-level threads for use in discrete event simulation.
Dustin Laurence wrote:
>Yeah, though even that is more heavyweight than coroutines, so your job
>is harder than mine.
Hmm?
On Sat, Jun 17, 2006 at 09:50:29AM -0400, Maurizio Vitale wrote:
> I'm looking at the very same problem, hoping to get very lightweight
> user-level threads for use in discrete event simulation.
Yeah, though even that is more heavyweight than coroutines, so your job
is harder tha
at 02:05:13PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
| >
| > > If every language were going to have the feature, then,
moving it
| > > down into the mid-end or back-end might make sense, but I
don't think
| > > it does in this case.
| >
| > Personally, I'd like, and
sense, but I don't think
| > > it does in this case.
| >
| > Personally, I'd like, and use, decent coroutines in C. But perhaps I am
| > the only one.
| >
| > > I wouldn't start with pthreads I don't think.
| >
| > That was my thought--I playe
.
>
> Personally, I'd like, and use, decent coroutines in C. But perhaps I am
> the only one.
>
> > I wouldn't start with pthreads I don't think.
>
> That was my thought--I played with it some but I intended it as a bit of
> threads practice. Using
barbarian" rank and lord it
over the peons. :-)
> I don't have any GCC credibility either but I once got an approving off-list
> reply from Damian Conway while discussing coroutines in the context of
> Perl 6 features -- which had me reading the university library's dusty
&g
ink
> it does in this case.
Personally, I'd like, and use, decent coroutines in C. But perhaps I am
the only one.
> I wouldn't start with pthreads I don't think.
That was my thought--I played with it some but I intended it as a bit of
threads practice. Usin
Dustin Laurence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm pretty sure this is stepping into deep quicksand, but I'll ask
> anyway...I'm interested in writing an FE for a language that has
> stackable coroutines (Lua-style, where you can yield and resume
> arbitrarily far
On 6/16/06, Dustin Laurence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm pretty sure this is stepping into deep quicksand, but I'll ask
anyway...I'm interested in writing an FE for a language that has
stackable coroutines (Lua-style, where you can yield and resume
arbitrarily far down
On Jun 16, 2006, at 1:41 PM, Dustin Laurence wrote:
I'm pretty sure this is stepping into deep quicksand
No, just hard work. It is only quicksand, if you start, but never
finish.
The mechanism I might favor would be to handle all the fun inside the
language front end. Objective-C does t
I'm pretty sure this is stepping into deep quicksand, but I'll ask
anyway...I'm interested in writing an FE for a language that has
stackable coroutines (Lua-style, where you can yield and resume
arbitrarily far down the call stack). I'm trying to wrap my head around
what woul
35 matches
Mail list logo
