You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I notice that there's no Drop implementation for Generator, and so it looks like it's owned stack won't get unwound, and so any resources owned by a Generator's stack will get leaked.
So, it seems that that the only way currently to forcefully unwind a generator's stack is to pass in a value that asks it to panic, such as in this example. Is that right?
I notice that context-rs has the ability to spawn a function on top of a recovered stack, which might be an option for future implementation. But that seems quite risky.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I notice that there's no Drop implementation for Generator, and so it looks like it's owned stack won't get unwound, and so any resources owned by a Generator's stack will get leaked.
So, it seems that that the only way currently to forcefully unwind a generator's stack is to pass in a value that asks it to panic, such as in this example. Is that right?
I notice that context-rs has the ability to spawn a function on top of a recovered stack, which might be an option for future implementation. But that seems quite risky.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: