Re: [PATCH Coroutines]Insert the default return_void call at correct position

On 2/3/20 12:55 AM, bin.cheng wrote: Hi, Exception in coroutine is not correctly handled because the default return_void call is now inserted before the finish suspend point, rather than at the end of the original coroutine body. This patch fixes the issue by generating following code:

Re: [PATCH Coroutines]Insert the default return_void call at correct position

Hello Bin, Nathan, Iain Sandoe wrote: We are seeking to clarify the standard wording around this (and the cases where unhandled_exception() returns - hopefully during the WG21 meeting this week, FWIW, I think your interpretation makes sense here. It’s not clear if the committee will

Re: [PATCH Coroutines]Insert the default return_void call at correct position

Hi Bin, Bin.Cheng wrote: > Ping. We are seeking to clarify the standard wording around this (and the cases where unhandled_exception() returns - hopefully during the WG21 meeting this week, FWIW, I think your interpretation makes sense here. thanks Iain > > Thanks, > bin > > On Mon, Feb

Re: [PATCH Coroutines]Insert the default return_void call at correct position

Ping. Thanks, bin On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 1:55 PM bin.cheng wrote: > > Hi, > > Exception in coroutine is not correctly handled because the default > return_void call is now inserted before the finish suspend point, > rather than at the end of the original coroutine body. This patch > fixes the

[PATCH Coroutines]Insert the default return_void call at correct position

Hi, Exception in coroutine is not correctly handled because the default return_void call is now inserted before the finish suspend point, rather than at the end of the original coroutine body. This patch fixes the issue by generating following code: co_await promise.initial_suspend(); try {