Re: [Boost-Users] Re: Newbie query: no "deamon" thread?

6 Jun 2003

      ...
What is "the right thing"?
You don't HAVE to join(). The creating thread will just keep going if
you don't. If you join, it waits.
If you're passing ownership (e.g. delete responsibility) across thread
boundaries, you have to be careful, but that doesn't have much to do
with join().
After starting the thread, you can use a condtional in the creator to
wait for the thread to "get going" and accept ownership, sort of a
"started()" rather than an "ended()", like join(). Or you can flip it
around and have the started thread wait on the conditional whilst the
creator thread continues to use what will eventually be given to the
I was asking this question for someone else.  Except for trivial programs,
I always use one form of pool or another.  Spend a lot of time reading
"pattern" books.  To tell the truth, I have no idea what the "real" cost of
creating & killing threads is for the various OSs.  I just treat it like
small object memory allocation:  if you don't have a custom allocator, try
to avoid doing it.  ;)

                      Mark Sizer                                                                                                       
                                     cc:                                                                                    
                      Sent by: news             Subject: [Boost-Users] Re: Newbie query:  no "deamon" thread?                          

                      06/05/2003 05:23                                                                                                 
                      PM                                                                                                               
                      Please respond to                                                                                                
                      Boost-Users                                                                                                      

BTW: Is there enough of a penalty to creating threads that a thread pool
should be used rather than creating them on-demand? I'm curious because
I'm using a pool pulling from a work queue.

- Mark

P.S. I realize "enough" is a bit vague.

Mark Sizer wrote:

thread.
...
Is that at all helpful?
- Mark
dick.bridges@tais.com wrote:
...
I need to spawn worker threads that simply perform a task and exit.  All
the examples I can find seem to use join() to cleanup the thread
resources
...
...
from another thread.  Isn't there some way to declare worker threads so
that they "do the right thing" as they exit the thread function?
TIA
Info: http://www.boost.org
Wiki: http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl
Unsubscribe: mailto:boost-users-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
...
...
Info: http://www.boost.org
Wiki: http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl
Unsubscribe: mailto:boost-users-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
...
Info: http://www.boost.org
Wiki: http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl
Unsubscribe: mailto:boost-users-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

dick.bridges＠tais.com

tags

participants (1)