#include "stdlib.h" #include "stdio.h" #include "unistd.h" #include "string" #include "pthread.h" class Global { public: ~Global() { std::cout << "Global object dtor\n"; } }; class A { public: ~A() { std::cout << "A dtor\n"; } }; void thread_main() { int i = 0; A a; while (true) { std::cout << "thread_main" << i++ << std::endl; sleep(1); if (i == 5) break; } } void atexit_handler() { std::cout << "atexit handler\n"; } Global global_variable; int main(int argc, char **argv) { const int result = std::atexit(atexit_handler); std::thread t(thread_main); t.detach(); return 0; }This snippet would produce the following output, note that the destructor for the object allocated on detached thread is not getting called.
atexit handler thread_main0 Global object dtor *** Exited normally ***So the thread is abandoned non-gracefully, in a manner that reminds of the daemon thread in Java. Really, while JVM would not finish application if there is at least one active non-daemon thread, but if the thread is daemon thread it's existence wouldn't prevent app from exiting, and such thread would be abandoned - no stack unwinding, no finally blocks getting called for it. Such threads are used for tasks like garbage collection.
What if std::exit() would not be called from main()? In the following snippet I'm finishing the main thread without calling return and hence exit() is not getting called, because there's still a running thread around.
int main(int argc, char **argv) { const int result = std::atexit(atexit_handler); std::thread t(thread_main); t.detach(); pthread_exit(NULL); //return 0; }This will let the detached thread complete and then the process exits releasing all the resources.
thread_main0 thread_main1 thread_main2 thread_main3 thread_main4 A dtor atexit handler Global object dtor *** Exited normally ***
No comments :
Post a Comment