noop_coroutine_handle
guaranteesSection: 17.12.5.2.4 [coroutine.handle.noop.resumption] Status: C++23 Submitter: Casey Carter Opened: 2020-07-01 Last modified: 2023-11-22
Priority: 2
View all issues with C++23 status.
Discussion:
17.12.5.2.4 [coroutine.handle.noop.resumption]/2 states "Remarks: If noop_coroutine_handle
is converted to coroutine_handle<>
, calls to operator()
, resume
and
destroy
on that handle will also have no observable effects." This suggests that e.g. in this function:
void f(coroutine_handle<> meow) { auto woof = noop_coroutine(); static_cast<coroutine_handle<>&>(woof) = meow; static_cast<coroutine_handle<>&>(woof).resume(); }
the final call to coroutine_handle<>::resume
must have no effect regardless of what
coroutine (if any) meow
refers to, contradicting the specification of
coroutine_handle<>::resume
. Even absent this contradiction, implementing the specification
requires coroutine_handle<>::resume
to determine if *this
is a base subobject of a
noop_coroutine_handle
, which seems pointlessly expensive to implement.
noop_coroutine_handle
's
ptr
is always a non-null pointer value." Similar to the above case, a slicing assignment of a
default-initialized coroutine_handle<>
to a noop_coroutine_handle
must result in
ptr
having a null pointer value — another contradiction between the requirements of
noop_coroutine_handle
and coroutine_handle<>
.
[2020-07-12; Reflector prioritization]
Set priority to 2 after reflector discussions.
[2020-07-29 Tim adds PR and comments]
The root cause for this issue as well as issue 3469 is the unnecessary
public derivation from coroutine_handle<void>
. The proposed resolution below
replaces the derivation with a conversion function and adds explicit declarations for
members that were previously inherited. It also modifies the preconditions
on from_address
with goal of making it impossible to obtain a coroutine_handle<P>
to a coroutine whose promise type is not P
in well-defined code.
[2020-08-21; Issue processing telecon: moved to Tentatively Ready]
[2020-11-09 Approved In November virtual meeting. Status changed: Tentatively Ready → WP.]
Proposed resolution:
This wording is relative to N4861 and also resolves LWG issue 3469.
Edit 17.12.4 [coroutine.handle] as indicated:
namespace std { […] template<class Promise> struct coroutine_handle: coroutine_handle<>{ // [coroutine.handle.con], construct/resetusing coroutine_handle<>::coroutine_handle;constexpr coroutine_handle() noexcept; constexpr coroutine_handle(nullptr_t) noexcept; static coroutine_handle from_promise(Promise&); coroutine_handle& operator=(nullptr_t) noexcept; // [coroutine.handle.export.import], export/import constexpr void* address() const noexcept; static constexpr coroutine_handle from_address(void* addr); // [coroutine.handle.conv], conversion constexpr operator coroutine_handle<>() const noexcept; // [coroutine.handle.observers], observers constexpr explicit operator bool() const noexcept; bool done() const; // [coroutine.handle.resumption], resumption void operator()() const; void resume() const; void destroy() const; // [coroutine.handle.promise], promise access Promise& promise() const; private: void* ptr; // exposition only }; }-1- An object of type
coroutine_handle<T>
is called a coroutine handle and can be used to refer to a suspended or executing coroutine. Adefault-constructedcoroutine_handle
object whose memberaddress()
returns a null pointer value does not refer to any coroutine. Twocoroutine_handle
objects refer to the same coroutine if and only if their memberaddress()
returns the same value.
Add the following subclause under 17.12.4 [coroutine.handle], immediately after 17.12.4.2 [coroutine.handle.con]:
?.?.?.? Conversion [coroutine.handle.conv]
constexpr operator coroutine_handle<>() const noexcept;-1- Effects: Equivalent to:
return coroutine_handle<>::from_address(address());
.
Edit 17.12.4.4 [coroutine.handle.export.import] as indicated, splitting the two versions:
static constexpr coroutine_handle<> coroutine_handle<>::from_address(void* addr);-?- Preconditions:
-?- Postconditions:addr
was obtained via a prior call toaddress
on an object whose type is a specialization ofcoroutine_handle
.from_address(address()) == *this
.static constexpr coroutine_handle<Promise> coroutine_handle<Promise>::from_address(void* addr);-2- Preconditions:
-3- Postconditions:addr
was obtained via a prior call toaddress
on an object of type cvcoroutine_handle<Promise>
.from_address(address()) == *this
.
Edit 17.12.5.2 [coroutine.handle.noop] as indicated:
namespace std { template<> struct coroutine_handle<noop_coroutine_promise>: coroutine_handle<>{ // [coroutine.handle.noop.conv], conversion constexpr operator coroutine_handle<>() const noexcept; // [coroutine.handle.noop.observers], observers constexpr explicit operator bool() const noexcept; constexpr bool done() const noexcept; // [coroutine.handle.noop.resumption], resumption constexpr void operator()() const noexcept; constexpr void resume() const noexcept; constexpr void destroy() const noexcept; // [coroutine.handle.noop.promise], promise access noop_coroutine_promise& promise() const noexcept; // [coroutine.handle.noop.address], address constexpr void* address() const noexcept; private: coroutine_handle(unspecified); void* ptr; // exposition only }; }
Add the following subclause under 17.12.5.2 [coroutine.handle.noop], immediately before 17.12.5.2.3 [coroutine.handle.noop.observers]:
?.?.?.?.? Conversion [coroutine.handle.noop.conv]
constexpr operator coroutine_handle<>() const noexcept;-1- Effects: Equivalent to:
return coroutine_handle<>::from_address(address());
.