Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Continuations
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 00:25:39 +0000
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <6eaf376ece1c49636550223f6c99491b@www.novabbs.org>
References: <v6tbki$3g9rg$1@dont-email.me> <4j389jlb44kuhi3o5igf8ucnks3q9m3lc8@4ax.com> <v714in$1foh$2@gal.iecc.com> <lfims1Fl57mU1@mid.individual.net> <v71jfh$jko$1@gal.iecc.com> <pFdlO.42948$BYv6.40771@fx09.iad> <v74ct9$tuk4$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3426565"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="65wTazMNTleAJDh/pRqmKE7ADni/0wesT78+pyiDW8A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Posting-User: ac58ceb75ea22753186dae54d967fed894c3dce8
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$zeZpgwFjmxtVZC9PDRzZmOhjYKGyH43miMu8Pr7zRlxuYuwZPDjqq
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2089
Lines: 23

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 23:55:21 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 14:12:32 -0400, EricP wrote:
>
>> The effect is that code bounces from action routine to action routine
>> carrying its execute context with it, waiting for something external,
>> evaluating the result and deciding what action to do next.
>
> The thing that coroutines bring to the table is that you don’t have to
> break up the code that executes in this common context into separate
> pieces that are each invoked via a callback and end in a reschedule
> call.
> Intead, you just write it as a single block, with explicit “await” calls
> at the various points along the way where rescheduling happens.

Is that still valuable if it cost 50× what a subroutine call costs ???

Is that still valuable if you can do it yourself at only 20× the cost
???

> The net result is the logic is much easier to follow, and there is often
> less of it.

The right answer late is the wrong answer.