Boost logo

Boost :

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-07-02 10:24:03

From: <williamkempf_at_[hidden]>


> 4) Creation within a loop and join all.
> void foo()
> {
> thread::ref threads[10];
> for (int i=0; i<10; ++i)
> threads[i] = thread::create(&bar);
> for (int i=0; i<10; ++i)
> threads[i]->join();
> }

An alternative:

void foo(int n)
    std::vector<thread::ref> threads; // reserve(n) possible

    for(int i = 0; i < n; ++i) threads.push_back(thread::create(&bar));

    thread::join(v.begin(), v.end()); // iterator version


> It appears to me that the thread ref concept is more efficient in
> only a couple of usage patterns, and then only theoretically, with
> most implementations probably producing identical results, or
> actually favoring the thread concept.

The main goal of the thread::ref design is not to beat the noncopyable
thread in efficiency. Its goals are to match it in efficiency and surpass it
in other areas, like being easier to use, less error prone, and integrating
well with the STL and other similar libraries that like lightweight copyable
objects [who doesn't?].

You don't look convinced that a handle/body based design is easier to use,

Peter Dimov
Multi Media Ltd.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at