Hi guys,
This threaded code can be improved further:
===============
~WorkerThread() {
while (!m_Running)
;
m_Thread.join();
m_Running = false;
}
================
Endlessly polling the m_Running with an empty while loop is inefficient. It
would be better to use the boost::condition and boost::mutex for thread
synchronization [the 2nd thread notifies the 1st (main() ) one when it
completes its task]. A possible improvement can be achieved like this:
--------------Begin-------------
boost::condition taskCompleted;
boost::mutex taskMutex;
class WorkerThread { // class definition
...
~WorkerThread() {
boost::mutex::scoped_lock lock(taskMutex);
{
taskCompleted.wait(lock); // wait for notification
m_Thread.join();
}
...
void run() {
boost::mutex::scoped_lock lock(taskMutex);
{
// work to do
// after work is done
taskCompleted.notify_one();// I am done, your turn now.
} // lock scope
} run() scope
}; // class definition
--------------end-------------
The volatile bool m_Running variable, its initialization and assignments,
and const bool isRunning() const function in the original code are no longer
needed.
Cheers,
Robert
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Ilya Sokolov
Rob Yull wrote:
WorkerThread() { m_Thread = boost::thread(boost::bind(&WorkerThread::run, boost::ref(this)));
It should not compile, you need
m_Thread = boost::thread(boost::bind(&WorkerThread::run, this));
or simply
m_Thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::run, this);
m_Running = true;
}
_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users