Is it appropriate then to deprecate the library and to move the code eventually into racket/control-examples?
On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:08 AM, Robby Findler wrote: > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Matthias Felleisen > <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: >> At some point someone (Asumu?) mentioned that this is the only >> use of coroutine in our code base. Is this correct? > > grep suggests that there are no more (none on planet either). > > FWIW, this is still "morally" a coroutine in the sense that it starts > some work and pauses in the middle of the work, either resuming the > work later or aborting the work (depending on what happened during the > pause). And it is cooperative, pausing the work only all spots where > it is safe to do so. > > The reason I went away from the racket/engine library is that I wanted > to have the work happen on a specific thread (the eventspace handler > thread for the drracket eventspace) and racket/engine doesn't do that. > I considered using continuations but the work is in a simple tail > recursive loop (well, except for a for-each outside that) so I just > rewrote it directly. > > Robby
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
