multithreading - Does C++ 11 thread automatically destroy after detach -


normally, assume c++ 11 thread automatically destroy after detach. thing is, can't find prove assumption.

according this article

once detached, thread should live way forever.

forever? if function of thread finish, resource remain forever?

according this article

after call function, thread object becomes non-joinable , can destroyed safely.

it can destroyed safely, automatically?

if it's not destroyed automatically, how destroy (not forcefully, after function of thread end)

thanks reading.

you should consult better reference. std::thread::detach:

separates thread of execution thread object, allowing execution continue independently. allocated resources freed once thread exits.

after calling detach *this no longer owns thread.

so answer questions (if aren't already):

forever?

no. if thread finishes (for example: if counts 10), done , not running anymore.

does resource remain forever?

no, when thread finishes, every resource thread freed (like variables , such).

it can destroyed safely, automatically?

what mean? when thread done, destroyed (automatically), regardless of whether call detach or not. difference here, referring thread object, actual std::thread instance.

normally, std::thread's destructor waits thread finish, if call detach, associated thread detached, , std::thread instance not refer thread.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

android - InAppBilling registering BroadcastReceiver in AndroidManifest -

i'm implementing inapp billing in android app. works well, however, i'm trying decouple broadcast receiver activity manifest. suggestion in android's trivialdrive sample: // important: dynamically register broadcast messages updated purchases. // register receiver here instead of <receiver> in manifest // because call getpurchases() @ startup, therefore can ignore // broadcasts sent while app isn't running. // note: registering listener in activity bad idea, done here // because sample. regardless, receiver must registered after // iabhelper setup, before first call getpurchases(). currently there's class extends broadcastreceiver : public class iabbroadcastreceiver extends broadcastreceiver { /** * intent action receiver should filter for. */ public static final string action = "com.android.vending.billing.purchases_updated"; private final iabbroadcastlistener mlistener; public iabbroadcastreceiver(iabbroadcastlistener listener) { m...
Read more

python Tkinter Capturing keyboard events save as one single string -

is possible store keyboard events 1 string? code below stores 1 char , prints it. card reader or bar code reader, contains collection of character/ string not 1 character @ time. goal save char pressed text variable. from tkinter import * root = tk() def key(event): text= event.char text+= event.char print ("pressed", text) def callback(event): frame.focus_set() print ("clicked at", event.x, event.y) frame = frame(root, width=100, height=100) frame.bind("<key>", key) frame.bind("<button-1>", callback) frame.pack() root.mainloop() currently, creating text variable , everytime key() function gets called, , text stores last character typed. you can define text module level variable , , use module level text inside key function - text = '' def key(event): global text text+= event.char print("pressed", text)
Read more

sql server - Why does Linq-to-SQL add unnecessary COUNT()? -

here tables: create table customer ( cid int primary key, name varchar(32) ) create table ord ( oid int primary key, cid int foreign key references customer, address varchar(20) ) here's linq-to-sql statement: var aaa = c in db.customer select new { c, o = c.ord.tolist() }; and here's inexplicable query generated linq-to-sql: select [t0].[cid] [cid], [t0].[name] [name], [t1].[oid] [oid], [t1].[cid] [cid2], [t1].[address] [address], (select count(*) [dbo].[ord] [t2] [t2].[cid] = [t0].[cid]) [value] [dbo].[customer] [t0] left outer join [dbo].[ord] [t1] on [t1].[cid] = [t0].[cid] order [t0].[cid], [t1].[oid] i want understand how rid of count(*) part. it's entirely uncalled for! linq needs count(*) in order determine number of entries returned o = c.ord.tolist() .
Read more