220 14234 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=5Bstd=2Dproposals=5D_Re=3A_Question_for_Germ=E1n_Diago=3A_N413?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?4_and_N4244?= Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 17:16:52 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 64 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <44e2f2f7-aff5-4cfa-86ff-aefad5b971ab@isocpp.org> <31ef7e37-5775-4584-854a-f8d934e8a4b3@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_288_126892131.1414369012227" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1414369023 6018 80.91.229.3 (27 Oct 2014 00:17:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 00:17:03 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCYZZ4E5WQCRB5M5W2RAKGQEUMDHTAQ@isocpp.org Mon Oct 27 01:16:56 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-pd0-f197.google.com ([209.85.192.197]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XiXzT-0001MU-SG for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 01:16:56 +0100 Original-Received: by mail-pd0-f197.google.com with SMTP id fp1sf10279974pdb.4 for ; Sun, 26 Oct 2014 17:16:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references :subject:mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence :mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=mPrhfAl+XVKAdBMDTANYmkCklN4Yzb9IkTujacssp8I=; b=gGvtw2qrneVUe3sskeuqd8Ou/cpYassnFzG/jb/hx4xv0BViIJkcGLIjL3QgDGQEFv 4vqEm0X9ah5gnCVJQ0lcCwwKCTJDXHdCw/yxaAdDs98uBUbtek18Pw9afTiizuSpWD02 wClahP/ue/C08MJ2HHdT3AnWBYTwu5m2uv0aiWQ56mmj4t+YZ+su9nxImf5oujuGokYL Dw4igyyQz29o3jYYuHnwjhT6zJChjkk0v7d67Cnxq1d1iD6ZTC/tAHlpfSl8UiBlApfu hgWNWPwlqaTbPgBC9T9GrLo22HFLd0uA3KxfpVresbxF/VHrBGi8vLHE0TG9lIVs7mZw Tmbg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnqxzt0524r4asKEX4pOzVA72GTXJdaxLoFvwfJ4qb4DZ44KxQH7ruUFyvgu3NMu/SITaSA X-Received: by 10.70.64.163 with SMTP id p3mr18523339pds.2.1414369014400; Sun, 26 Oct 2014 17:16:54 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.107.37.208 with SMTP id l199ls1903094iol.54.gmail; Sun, 26 Oct 2014 17:16:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.103.6 with SMTP id fs6mr177624igb.5.1414369013456; Sun, 26 Oct 2014 17:16:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <31ef7e37-5775-4584-854a-f8d934e8a4b3@isocpp.org> X-Original-Sender: jeremy@jeremyms.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:14234 Archived-At: ------=_Part_288_126892131.1414369012227 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sunday, October 26, 2014 11:10:06 AM UTC-7, Gor Nishanov wrote: > > > I tried using them, but the code was too cumbersome and there were various > restrictions on what you can or cannot do in lambda* body. For example, you > cannot use std::mutex or std::atomic or any immobile type in a resumable > lambda (or lambda*), because that will make your lambda unmovable and > uncopyable. you can't do much with it. > > It seems reasonable for the move and copy constructors to simply throw if the current state is not movable/copyable. (Chris suggested this as a possibility as well.) This wouldn't introduce any extra overhead since a switch on the state is necessary anyway. The most common and important case would be moving from the initial state, which is always possible. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/. ------=_Part_288_126892131.1414369012227 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sunday, October 26, 2014 11:10:06 AM UTC-7, Gor Nishano= v wrote:

<= div>I tried using them, but the code was too cumbersome and there were vari= ous restrictions on what you can or cannot do in lambda* body. For example,= you cannot use std::mutex or std::atomic or any immobile type in a resumab= le lambda (or lambda*), because that will make your lambda unmovable and un= copyable. you can't do much with it.


It seems reasonable for the move and copy constructors to simply= throw if the current state is not movable/copyable.  (Chris suggested= this as a possibility as well.)  This wouldn't introduce any extra ov= erhead since a switch on the state is necessary anyway.  The most comm= on and important case would be moving from the initial state, which is alwa= ys possible.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposa= ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<= /a>.
------=_Part_288_126892131.1414369012227-- .