Changeset b54118a

Timestamp:

Jun 7, 2020, 12:28:06 PM (4 years ago)

Author:

Peter A. Buhr <pabuhr@…>

Branches:

ADT, arm-eh, ast-experimental, enum, forall-pointer-decay, jacob/cs343-translation, master, new-ast, new-ast-unique-expr, pthread-emulation, qualifiedEnum

Children:

ee06db5c

Parents:

393d59a

Message:

update referee response

File:

• doc/papers/concurrency/response2 (modified) (1 diff)

doc/papers/concurrency/response2

@@ -692 +692 @@
 choosing between a generator or coroutine; either form can receive (input) or
 return (output) millions of values. As well, simple versus complex computations
-is also not a criterion for selection as both forms can be very
-sophisticated. As stated in the paper, a coroutine brings generality to the
-implementation because of the addition stack, whereas generators have
-restrictions on standard software-engining practices: variable placement, no
-helper functions without creating an explicit generator stack, and no symmetric
-control-flow.
+is also not an absolute criterion for selection as both forms can be simple or
+complex.
+
+As stated in the paper, a coroutine brings generality to the implementation
+because of the addition stack, whereas generators have restrictions on standard
+software-engineering practices: variable placement, no helper functions without
+creating an explicit generator stack, and no symmetric control-flow.  It is
+true that simple generators probably suffer less from restrictions. Also,
+simplicity means the amount of work done is small so the cost of the
+suspend/resume becomes a factor, where experiments show suspend/resume for a
+generator is 10 times faster than for a coroutines.
+
 
     * prefer threads for cases where parallel execution is desired or needed.