# Hgher Order Coroutines¶

Our previous example would not be consider good practice because the coroutines are not reusable components. Programming with coroutines is all about modularity. Lets see a better way:

// writer fibre
proc writer (out: %>int) ()
{
for i in 1..10 do
println$"Sending " + i.str; write (out,i); done } // reader fibre proc reader (inp: %<int) () { while true do var x = read inp; println$ "Read " + x.str;
done
}

proc start_network () {
// schannels for communication
var inp, out = mk_ioschannel_pair[int]();
var co_writer = writer inp;
spawn_fibre co_writer;
}

start_network;


This program does the same thing as our first example, however we have modularised the reader and writer by making them named procedures, and, explicitly passing in the channels they should communicate with.

The type %>int is a shorthand for oschannel[int], an output channel for ints, and %<int is a shorthande for ischannel[int], an input channel for ints. Since spawn_fibre requires a procedure that takes the argument () we have to add that as well.

Another refactoring here is that we have modularised the network constructing code into a procedure as well. It creates the channels needed, binds the reader and writer procedures to the channels they need, then spawns the bound procedures to create our fibres.

Then it returns. This is important! When it returns, it forgets the names temporarily given to the channels. This means the mainline, following the call to start_network, cannot reach the channels. Although the channels are named in the constructor, they’re forgotten afterwards, except by the coroutines that use them. We also forget the names temporarily given to the bound coroutines.

Forgetting what you do not need to know is an absolute imperative when using coroutines because reachability is what is used to drive termination. I hope you noticed, that even though the reader has an infinite loop, the program still terminates!