Catching exception from worker thread in the main thread
I didn't find a concise answer to the following problem:I have a producer - consumer threading model where main thread is the consumer while some worker thread is the producer.The producer thread runs it's thread loop during the application execution and it is possible for it to throw exceptions occasionally.The main thread is UI thread which should pop-up exception messages including those coming from different threads. How can I catch these exceptions in the main thread?
Using boost on Windows with C++0x
WorkerThread.cpp
WorkerThread::WorkerThread(){
m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread,this);
}
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
while(true)
{
boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
try{
///some work is done here...
}catch(std::exception &e){
/// some exception is thrown
/// notify main thread of the exception
}
}
}
Important to note that I have no ability to wrap WorkerThread in the main thread with try{}catch as it is created at some point and from then on runs on its own till the application termination.
c++ multithreading boost
add a comment |
I didn't find a concise answer to the following problem:I have a producer - consumer threading model where main thread is the consumer while some worker thread is the producer.The producer thread runs it's thread loop during the application execution and it is possible for it to throw exceptions occasionally.The main thread is UI thread which should pop-up exception messages including those coming from different threads. How can I catch these exceptions in the main thread?
Using boost on Windows with C++0x
WorkerThread.cpp
WorkerThread::WorkerThread(){
m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread,this);
}
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
while(true)
{
boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
try{
///some work is done here...
}catch(std::exception &e){
/// some exception is thrown
/// notify main thread of the exception
}
}
}
Important to note that I have no ability to wrap WorkerThread in the main thread with try{}catch as it is created at some point and from then on runs on its own till the application termination.
c++ multithreading boost
7
Dear internet, you do not need to usebind
withthread
. Just saym_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:08
Thanks for the tip :)
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 10:46
add a comment |
I didn't find a concise answer to the following problem:I have a producer - consumer threading model where main thread is the consumer while some worker thread is the producer.The producer thread runs it's thread loop during the application execution and it is possible for it to throw exceptions occasionally.The main thread is UI thread which should pop-up exception messages including those coming from different threads. How can I catch these exceptions in the main thread?
Using boost on Windows with C++0x
WorkerThread.cpp
WorkerThread::WorkerThread(){
m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread,this);
}
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
while(true)
{
boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
try{
///some work is done here...
}catch(std::exception &e){
/// some exception is thrown
/// notify main thread of the exception
}
}
}
Important to note that I have no ability to wrap WorkerThread in the main thread with try{}catch as it is created at some point and from then on runs on its own till the application termination.
c++ multithreading boost
I didn't find a concise answer to the following problem:I have a producer - consumer threading model where main thread is the consumer while some worker thread is the producer.The producer thread runs it's thread loop during the application execution and it is possible for it to throw exceptions occasionally.The main thread is UI thread which should pop-up exception messages including those coming from different threads. How can I catch these exceptions in the main thread?
Using boost on Windows with C++0x
WorkerThread.cpp
WorkerThread::WorkerThread(){
m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread,this);
}
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
while(true)
{
boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
try{
///some work is done here...
}catch(std::exception &e){
/// some exception is thrown
/// notify main thread of the exception
}
}
}
Important to note that I have no ability to wrap WorkerThread in the main thread with try{}catch as it is created at some point and from then on runs on its own till the application termination.
c++ multithreading boost
c++ multithreading boost
edited Aug 13 '14 at 10:47
asked Aug 13 '14 at 9:24
Michael IV
5,117862152
5,117862152
7
Dear internet, you do not need to usebind
withthread
. Just saym_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:08
Thanks for the tip :)
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 10:46
add a comment |
7
Dear internet, you do not need to usebind
withthread
. Just saym_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:08
Thanks for the tip :)
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 10:46
7
7
Dear internet, you do not need to use
bind
with thread
. Just say m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:08
Dear internet, you do not need to use
bind
with thread
. Just say m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:08
Thanks for the tip :)
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 10:46
Thanks for the tip :)
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 10:46
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Firstly, you do not need to use bind
with thread
. Doing so just adds unnecessary copying and makes the code harder to read. I wish everyone would stop doing that.
WorkerThread::WorkerThread(){
m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
}
You can store an exception in an exception_ptr
and pass that to the other thread, e.g. in std::queue<std::exception_ptr>
:
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
while(true)
{
boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
try{
///some work is done here...
}catch(std::exception &e){
m_queue.push(std::current_exception());
}
}
}
std::exception_ptr WorkerThread::last_exception()
{
boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
std::exception_ptr e;
if (!m_queue.empty())
{
e = m_queue.front();
m_queue.pop();
}
return e;
}
Then in the other thread rethrow it and handle it:
if (auto ep = workerThread.last_exception())
{
// do something with exception
try
{
std::rethrow_exception(ep);
}
catch (const std::exception& e)
{
std::cerr << "Error in worker thread: " << e.what() << 'n';
}
}
If you can't use std::exception_ptr
Boost has its own implementation of it, but I'm not sure what the Boost equivalent of current_exception
is. You might need to wrap the exception in another object so the Boost exception propagation mechanism can store it.
You might want to use a separate mutex for the exception queue from the main work loop (and move the m_mutex
lock inside the try
block) depending how long m_mutex
is usually locked by the worker thread.
A different approach uses C++11 futures, which handle passing exceptions between threads more conveniently. You need some way for the main thread to get a future for each unit of work the worker thread runs, which can be done with std::packaged_task
:
class WorkerThread
{
public:
WorkerThread(); // start m_thread, as before
template<typename F, typename... Args>
std::future<void> post(F f, Args&&... args)
{
Task task(std::bind<void>(f, std::forward<Args>(args)...));
auto fut = task.get_future();
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
m_tasks.push(std::move(task));
return fut;
}
private:
void drawThread();
std::mutex m_mutex;
using Task = std::packaged_task<void()>;
std::queue<Task> m_tasks;
std::thread m_thread;
};
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
Task task;
while(true)
{
{
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
task = std::move(m_tasks.front());
m_tasks.pop();
}
task(); // run the task
}
}
When the task is run any exceptions will be caught, stored in an exception_ptr
and held until the result is read through the associated future.
// other thread:
auto fut = workerThread.post(&someDrawingFunc, arg1, arg2);
...
// check future for errors
try {
fut.get();
} catch (const std::exception& e) {
// handle it
}
The producer thread could store the future
objects in a queue when posting work to the consumer, and some other piece of code could check each future in the queue to see if it's ready and call get()
to handle any exception.
1
+1 forpackaged_task
. People jump to barestd::thread
far too quickly, when for many purposes it is actually too low-level.
– ComicSansMS
Aug 13 '14 at 11:21
In this way,post
ing is required to catch the exceptions, isn't it? zz.. Btw, I think this approach is very similar toboost::asio::io_service::work
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:22
@Jonathan Wakely Any special reason you use lock_guard in your example?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@ikh, no, callingpost
can only throw an exception if memory allocation fails while creating thepackaged_task
or adding it to the queue. The task is run in thedrawThread
, so any exception happens there and is caught by thepackaged_task
and stored in thefuture
.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@MichaelIV, any reason you usedunique_lock
? Do you need to defer the lock? Or release it early? Or move it to another object? If not, why use the more complicated lock type?lock_guard
just locks and unlocks, nothing more, and that's all the code requires.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:25
|
show 5 more comments
Those answer suggest you to send exception_ptr
to main thread manually. That's not bad way, but I suggest you another way: std::promise
/ boost::promise
.
(Since I don't have boost in this computer now, so I'll go with std::promise
. However, there may be no big difference with boost.)
Look the example code:
#include <iostream>
#include <exception>
#include <thread>
#include <future>
#include <chrono>
void foo()
{
throw "mission failure >o<";
}
int main()
{
std::promise<void> prm;
std::thread thrd([&prm] {
try
{
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::seconds(5));
foo();
prm.set_value();
}
catch (...)
{
prm.set_exception(std::current_exception());
}
});
std::future<void> fu = prm.get_future();
for (int i = 0; ; i++)
{
if (fu.wait_for(std::chrono::seconds(1)) != std::future_status::timeout)
break;
std::cout << "waiting ... [" << i << "]n";
}
try
{
fu.get();
std::cout << "mission complete!n";
}
catch (const char *msg)
{
std::cerr << "exception: " << msg << "n";
}
thrd.join(); /* sorry for my compiler's absence of std::promise::set_value_at_thread_exit */
}
The benefit of this way is 1. you don't have to manage exceptions manually - std::promise
and std::future
will do everything and 2. you can use all feature around std::future
. In this case, I'm doing other things (outputing waiting...
message) while waiting the thread exit, through std::future::wait_for
.
1
The problem withpromise
is you can only use it once, the question shows catching exceptions in a loop, implying it needs to keep handling exceptions after the first
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:52
1
The way to do it withfuture
would be for the producer to pass work to the consumer in the form ofstd::packaged_task
objects, keeping hold of afuture
that shares state with each packaged_task. That way for every task posteed to the consumer there is a corresponding future, and a channel for getting the exception back
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:56
@JonathanWakelypackaged_task
?? I can't understand.. could you explain more?
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:08
I added another example to my answer, usingpackaged_task
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:14
add a comment |
In the worker thread, you can catch the exception, and then retrieve a std::exception_ptr
using std::current_exception
. You can then store this somewhere, pick it up in the main thread, and throw it with std::rethrow_exception
.
can you elaborate on how it is actually done?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
What do you mean?
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
I mean that what you said I have already read in several places but none really explains how to do it.
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:29
What do you mean "how to do it"? You get astd::exception_ptr
, pass it off to the main thread, and then rethrow it.
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:31
1
The same way you pass any object from one thread to another. There are various options, which is best depends on your requirements. Astd::queue<std::exception_ptr>
guarded by a mutex would be one way.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:05
|
show 1 more comment
Exceptions are synchronous. Which means there is no way to pass them between threads as exceptions. You cannot tell to any old thread "stop whatever you are doing and handle this". (Well you can if you deliver a POSIX signal to it, but that's not quite a C++ exception).
You can of course always pass an object with the exception data (as opposed to the state of being in an exception-handling mode) to another thread in the same way you would pass any other data between threads. A concurrent queue will do. Then you process it in the target thread. The target thread should be actively reading data from the queue.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f25282620%2fcatching-exception-from-worker-thread-in-the-main-thread%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Firstly, you do not need to use bind
with thread
. Doing so just adds unnecessary copying and makes the code harder to read. I wish everyone would stop doing that.
WorkerThread::WorkerThread(){
m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
}
You can store an exception in an exception_ptr
and pass that to the other thread, e.g. in std::queue<std::exception_ptr>
:
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
while(true)
{
boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
try{
///some work is done here...
}catch(std::exception &e){
m_queue.push(std::current_exception());
}
}
}
std::exception_ptr WorkerThread::last_exception()
{
boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
std::exception_ptr e;
if (!m_queue.empty())
{
e = m_queue.front();
m_queue.pop();
}
return e;
}
Then in the other thread rethrow it and handle it:
if (auto ep = workerThread.last_exception())
{
// do something with exception
try
{
std::rethrow_exception(ep);
}
catch (const std::exception& e)
{
std::cerr << "Error in worker thread: " << e.what() << 'n';
}
}
If you can't use std::exception_ptr
Boost has its own implementation of it, but I'm not sure what the Boost equivalent of current_exception
is. You might need to wrap the exception in another object so the Boost exception propagation mechanism can store it.
You might want to use a separate mutex for the exception queue from the main work loop (and move the m_mutex
lock inside the try
block) depending how long m_mutex
is usually locked by the worker thread.
A different approach uses C++11 futures, which handle passing exceptions between threads more conveniently. You need some way for the main thread to get a future for each unit of work the worker thread runs, which can be done with std::packaged_task
:
class WorkerThread
{
public:
WorkerThread(); // start m_thread, as before
template<typename F, typename... Args>
std::future<void> post(F f, Args&&... args)
{
Task task(std::bind<void>(f, std::forward<Args>(args)...));
auto fut = task.get_future();
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
m_tasks.push(std::move(task));
return fut;
}
private:
void drawThread();
std::mutex m_mutex;
using Task = std::packaged_task<void()>;
std::queue<Task> m_tasks;
std::thread m_thread;
};
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
Task task;
while(true)
{
{
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
task = std::move(m_tasks.front());
m_tasks.pop();
}
task(); // run the task
}
}
When the task is run any exceptions will be caught, stored in an exception_ptr
and held until the result is read through the associated future.
// other thread:
auto fut = workerThread.post(&someDrawingFunc, arg1, arg2);
...
// check future for errors
try {
fut.get();
} catch (const std::exception& e) {
// handle it
}
The producer thread could store the future
objects in a queue when posting work to the consumer, and some other piece of code could check each future in the queue to see if it's ready and call get()
to handle any exception.
1
+1 forpackaged_task
. People jump to barestd::thread
far too quickly, when for many purposes it is actually too low-level.
– ComicSansMS
Aug 13 '14 at 11:21
In this way,post
ing is required to catch the exceptions, isn't it? zz.. Btw, I think this approach is very similar toboost::asio::io_service::work
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:22
@Jonathan Wakely Any special reason you use lock_guard in your example?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@ikh, no, callingpost
can only throw an exception if memory allocation fails while creating thepackaged_task
or adding it to the queue. The task is run in thedrawThread
, so any exception happens there and is caught by thepackaged_task
and stored in thefuture
.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@MichaelIV, any reason you usedunique_lock
? Do you need to defer the lock? Or release it early? Or move it to another object? If not, why use the more complicated lock type?lock_guard
just locks and unlocks, nothing more, and that's all the code requires.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:25
|
show 5 more comments
Firstly, you do not need to use bind
with thread
. Doing so just adds unnecessary copying and makes the code harder to read. I wish everyone would stop doing that.
WorkerThread::WorkerThread(){
m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
}
You can store an exception in an exception_ptr
and pass that to the other thread, e.g. in std::queue<std::exception_ptr>
:
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
while(true)
{
boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
try{
///some work is done here...
}catch(std::exception &e){
m_queue.push(std::current_exception());
}
}
}
std::exception_ptr WorkerThread::last_exception()
{
boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
std::exception_ptr e;
if (!m_queue.empty())
{
e = m_queue.front();
m_queue.pop();
}
return e;
}
Then in the other thread rethrow it and handle it:
if (auto ep = workerThread.last_exception())
{
// do something with exception
try
{
std::rethrow_exception(ep);
}
catch (const std::exception& e)
{
std::cerr << "Error in worker thread: " << e.what() << 'n';
}
}
If you can't use std::exception_ptr
Boost has its own implementation of it, but I'm not sure what the Boost equivalent of current_exception
is. You might need to wrap the exception in another object so the Boost exception propagation mechanism can store it.
You might want to use a separate mutex for the exception queue from the main work loop (and move the m_mutex
lock inside the try
block) depending how long m_mutex
is usually locked by the worker thread.
A different approach uses C++11 futures, which handle passing exceptions between threads more conveniently. You need some way for the main thread to get a future for each unit of work the worker thread runs, which can be done with std::packaged_task
:
class WorkerThread
{
public:
WorkerThread(); // start m_thread, as before
template<typename F, typename... Args>
std::future<void> post(F f, Args&&... args)
{
Task task(std::bind<void>(f, std::forward<Args>(args)...));
auto fut = task.get_future();
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
m_tasks.push(std::move(task));
return fut;
}
private:
void drawThread();
std::mutex m_mutex;
using Task = std::packaged_task<void()>;
std::queue<Task> m_tasks;
std::thread m_thread;
};
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
Task task;
while(true)
{
{
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
task = std::move(m_tasks.front());
m_tasks.pop();
}
task(); // run the task
}
}
When the task is run any exceptions will be caught, stored in an exception_ptr
and held until the result is read through the associated future.
// other thread:
auto fut = workerThread.post(&someDrawingFunc, arg1, arg2);
...
// check future for errors
try {
fut.get();
} catch (const std::exception& e) {
// handle it
}
The producer thread could store the future
objects in a queue when posting work to the consumer, and some other piece of code could check each future in the queue to see if it's ready and call get()
to handle any exception.
1
+1 forpackaged_task
. People jump to barestd::thread
far too quickly, when for many purposes it is actually too low-level.
– ComicSansMS
Aug 13 '14 at 11:21
In this way,post
ing is required to catch the exceptions, isn't it? zz.. Btw, I think this approach is very similar toboost::asio::io_service::work
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:22
@Jonathan Wakely Any special reason you use lock_guard in your example?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@ikh, no, callingpost
can only throw an exception if memory allocation fails while creating thepackaged_task
or adding it to the queue. The task is run in thedrawThread
, so any exception happens there and is caught by thepackaged_task
and stored in thefuture
.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@MichaelIV, any reason you usedunique_lock
? Do you need to defer the lock? Or release it early? Or move it to another object? If not, why use the more complicated lock type?lock_guard
just locks and unlocks, nothing more, and that's all the code requires.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:25
|
show 5 more comments
Firstly, you do not need to use bind
with thread
. Doing so just adds unnecessary copying and makes the code harder to read. I wish everyone would stop doing that.
WorkerThread::WorkerThread(){
m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
}
You can store an exception in an exception_ptr
and pass that to the other thread, e.g. in std::queue<std::exception_ptr>
:
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
while(true)
{
boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
try{
///some work is done here...
}catch(std::exception &e){
m_queue.push(std::current_exception());
}
}
}
std::exception_ptr WorkerThread::last_exception()
{
boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
std::exception_ptr e;
if (!m_queue.empty())
{
e = m_queue.front();
m_queue.pop();
}
return e;
}
Then in the other thread rethrow it and handle it:
if (auto ep = workerThread.last_exception())
{
// do something with exception
try
{
std::rethrow_exception(ep);
}
catch (const std::exception& e)
{
std::cerr << "Error in worker thread: " << e.what() << 'n';
}
}
If you can't use std::exception_ptr
Boost has its own implementation of it, but I'm not sure what the Boost equivalent of current_exception
is. You might need to wrap the exception in another object so the Boost exception propagation mechanism can store it.
You might want to use a separate mutex for the exception queue from the main work loop (and move the m_mutex
lock inside the try
block) depending how long m_mutex
is usually locked by the worker thread.
A different approach uses C++11 futures, which handle passing exceptions between threads more conveniently. You need some way for the main thread to get a future for each unit of work the worker thread runs, which can be done with std::packaged_task
:
class WorkerThread
{
public:
WorkerThread(); // start m_thread, as before
template<typename F, typename... Args>
std::future<void> post(F f, Args&&... args)
{
Task task(std::bind<void>(f, std::forward<Args>(args)...));
auto fut = task.get_future();
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
m_tasks.push(std::move(task));
return fut;
}
private:
void drawThread();
std::mutex m_mutex;
using Task = std::packaged_task<void()>;
std::queue<Task> m_tasks;
std::thread m_thread;
};
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
Task task;
while(true)
{
{
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
task = std::move(m_tasks.front());
m_tasks.pop();
}
task(); // run the task
}
}
When the task is run any exceptions will be caught, stored in an exception_ptr
and held until the result is read through the associated future.
// other thread:
auto fut = workerThread.post(&someDrawingFunc, arg1, arg2);
...
// check future for errors
try {
fut.get();
} catch (const std::exception& e) {
// handle it
}
The producer thread could store the future
objects in a queue when posting work to the consumer, and some other piece of code could check each future in the queue to see if it's ready and call get()
to handle any exception.
Firstly, you do not need to use bind
with thread
. Doing so just adds unnecessary copying and makes the code harder to read. I wish everyone would stop doing that.
WorkerThread::WorkerThread(){
m_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
}
You can store an exception in an exception_ptr
and pass that to the other thread, e.g. in std::queue<std::exception_ptr>
:
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
while(true)
{
boost::unique_lock<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
try{
///some work is done here...
}catch(std::exception &e){
m_queue.push(std::current_exception());
}
}
}
std::exception_ptr WorkerThread::last_exception()
{
boost::lock_guard<boost::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
std::exception_ptr e;
if (!m_queue.empty())
{
e = m_queue.front();
m_queue.pop();
}
return e;
}
Then in the other thread rethrow it and handle it:
if (auto ep = workerThread.last_exception())
{
// do something with exception
try
{
std::rethrow_exception(ep);
}
catch (const std::exception& e)
{
std::cerr << "Error in worker thread: " << e.what() << 'n';
}
}
If you can't use std::exception_ptr
Boost has its own implementation of it, but I'm not sure what the Boost equivalent of current_exception
is. You might need to wrap the exception in another object so the Boost exception propagation mechanism can store it.
You might want to use a separate mutex for the exception queue from the main work loop (and move the m_mutex
lock inside the try
block) depending how long m_mutex
is usually locked by the worker thread.
A different approach uses C++11 futures, which handle passing exceptions between threads more conveniently. You need some way for the main thread to get a future for each unit of work the worker thread runs, which can be done with std::packaged_task
:
class WorkerThread
{
public:
WorkerThread(); // start m_thread, as before
template<typename F, typename... Args>
std::future<void> post(F f, Args&&... args)
{
Task task(std::bind<void>(f, std::forward<Args>(args)...));
auto fut = task.get_future();
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
m_tasks.push(std::move(task));
return fut;
}
private:
void drawThread();
std::mutex m_mutex;
using Task = std::packaged_task<void()>;
std::queue<Task> m_tasks;
std::thread m_thread;
};
void WorkerThread::drawThread()
{
Task task;
while(true)
{
{
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m_mutex);
task = std::move(m_tasks.front());
m_tasks.pop();
}
task(); // run the task
}
}
When the task is run any exceptions will be caught, stored in an exception_ptr
and held until the result is read through the associated future.
// other thread:
auto fut = workerThread.post(&someDrawingFunc, arg1, arg2);
...
// check future for errors
try {
fut.get();
} catch (const std::exception& e) {
// handle it
}
The producer thread could store the future
objects in a queue when posting work to the consumer, and some other piece of code could check each future in the queue to see if it's ready and call get()
to handle any exception.
edited Aug 13 '14 at 11:19
answered Aug 13 '14 at 10:16
Jonathan Wakely
129k16238401
129k16238401
1
+1 forpackaged_task
. People jump to barestd::thread
far too quickly, when for many purposes it is actually too low-level.
– ComicSansMS
Aug 13 '14 at 11:21
In this way,post
ing is required to catch the exceptions, isn't it? zz.. Btw, I think this approach is very similar toboost::asio::io_service::work
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:22
@Jonathan Wakely Any special reason you use lock_guard in your example?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@ikh, no, callingpost
can only throw an exception if memory allocation fails while creating thepackaged_task
or adding it to the queue. The task is run in thedrawThread
, so any exception happens there and is caught by thepackaged_task
and stored in thefuture
.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@MichaelIV, any reason you usedunique_lock
? Do you need to defer the lock? Or release it early? Or move it to another object? If not, why use the more complicated lock type?lock_guard
just locks and unlocks, nothing more, and that's all the code requires.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:25
|
show 5 more comments
1
+1 forpackaged_task
. People jump to barestd::thread
far too quickly, when for many purposes it is actually too low-level.
– ComicSansMS
Aug 13 '14 at 11:21
In this way,post
ing is required to catch the exceptions, isn't it? zz.. Btw, I think this approach is very similar toboost::asio::io_service::work
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:22
@Jonathan Wakely Any special reason you use lock_guard in your example?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@ikh, no, callingpost
can only throw an exception if memory allocation fails while creating thepackaged_task
or adding it to the queue. The task is run in thedrawThread
, so any exception happens there and is caught by thepackaged_task
and stored in thefuture
.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@MichaelIV, any reason you usedunique_lock
? Do you need to defer the lock? Or release it early? Or move it to another object? If not, why use the more complicated lock type?lock_guard
just locks and unlocks, nothing more, and that's all the code requires.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:25
1
1
+1 for
packaged_task
. People jump to bare std::thread
far too quickly, when for many purposes it is actually too low-level.– ComicSansMS
Aug 13 '14 at 11:21
+1 for
packaged_task
. People jump to bare std::thread
far too quickly, when for many purposes it is actually too low-level.– ComicSansMS
Aug 13 '14 at 11:21
In this way,
post
ing is required to catch the exceptions, isn't it? zz.. Btw, I think this approach is very similar to boost::asio::io_service::work
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:22
In this way,
post
ing is required to catch the exceptions, isn't it? zz.. Btw, I think this approach is very similar to boost::asio::io_service::work
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:22
@Jonathan Wakely Any special reason you use lock_guard in your example?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@Jonathan Wakely Any special reason you use lock_guard in your example?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@ikh, no, calling
post
can only throw an exception if memory allocation fails while creating the packaged_task
or adding it to the queue. The task is run in the drawThread
, so any exception happens there and is caught by the packaged_task
and stored in the future
.– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@ikh, no, calling
post
can only throw an exception if memory allocation fails while creating the packaged_task
or adding it to the queue. The task is run in the drawThread
, so any exception happens there and is caught by the packaged_task
and stored in the future
.– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:23
@MichaelIV, any reason you used
unique_lock
? Do you need to defer the lock? Or release it early? Or move it to another object? If not, why use the more complicated lock type? lock_guard
just locks and unlocks, nothing more, and that's all the code requires.– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:25
@MichaelIV, any reason you used
unique_lock
? Do you need to defer the lock? Or release it early? Or move it to another object? If not, why use the more complicated lock type? lock_guard
just locks and unlocks, nothing more, and that's all the code requires.– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:25
|
show 5 more comments
Those answer suggest you to send exception_ptr
to main thread manually. That's not bad way, but I suggest you another way: std::promise
/ boost::promise
.
(Since I don't have boost in this computer now, so I'll go with std::promise
. However, there may be no big difference with boost.)
Look the example code:
#include <iostream>
#include <exception>
#include <thread>
#include <future>
#include <chrono>
void foo()
{
throw "mission failure >o<";
}
int main()
{
std::promise<void> prm;
std::thread thrd([&prm] {
try
{
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::seconds(5));
foo();
prm.set_value();
}
catch (...)
{
prm.set_exception(std::current_exception());
}
});
std::future<void> fu = prm.get_future();
for (int i = 0; ; i++)
{
if (fu.wait_for(std::chrono::seconds(1)) != std::future_status::timeout)
break;
std::cout << "waiting ... [" << i << "]n";
}
try
{
fu.get();
std::cout << "mission complete!n";
}
catch (const char *msg)
{
std::cerr << "exception: " << msg << "n";
}
thrd.join(); /* sorry for my compiler's absence of std::promise::set_value_at_thread_exit */
}
The benefit of this way is 1. you don't have to manage exceptions manually - std::promise
and std::future
will do everything and 2. you can use all feature around std::future
. In this case, I'm doing other things (outputing waiting...
message) while waiting the thread exit, through std::future::wait_for
.
1
The problem withpromise
is you can only use it once, the question shows catching exceptions in a loop, implying it needs to keep handling exceptions after the first
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:52
1
The way to do it withfuture
would be for the producer to pass work to the consumer in the form ofstd::packaged_task
objects, keeping hold of afuture
that shares state with each packaged_task. That way for every task posteed to the consumer there is a corresponding future, and a channel for getting the exception back
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:56
@JonathanWakelypackaged_task
?? I can't understand.. could you explain more?
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:08
I added another example to my answer, usingpackaged_task
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:14
add a comment |
Those answer suggest you to send exception_ptr
to main thread manually. That's not bad way, but I suggest you another way: std::promise
/ boost::promise
.
(Since I don't have boost in this computer now, so I'll go with std::promise
. However, there may be no big difference with boost.)
Look the example code:
#include <iostream>
#include <exception>
#include <thread>
#include <future>
#include <chrono>
void foo()
{
throw "mission failure >o<";
}
int main()
{
std::promise<void> prm;
std::thread thrd([&prm] {
try
{
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::seconds(5));
foo();
prm.set_value();
}
catch (...)
{
prm.set_exception(std::current_exception());
}
});
std::future<void> fu = prm.get_future();
for (int i = 0; ; i++)
{
if (fu.wait_for(std::chrono::seconds(1)) != std::future_status::timeout)
break;
std::cout << "waiting ... [" << i << "]n";
}
try
{
fu.get();
std::cout << "mission complete!n";
}
catch (const char *msg)
{
std::cerr << "exception: " << msg << "n";
}
thrd.join(); /* sorry for my compiler's absence of std::promise::set_value_at_thread_exit */
}
The benefit of this way is 1. you don't have to manage exceptions manually - std::promise
and std::future
will do everything and 2. you can use all feature around std::future
. In this case, I'm doing other things (outputing waiting...
message) while waiting the thread exit, through std::future::wait_for
.
1
The problem withpromise
is you can only use it once, the question shows catching exceptions in a loop, implying it needs to keep handling exceptions after the first
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:52
1
The way to do it withfuture
would be for the producer to pass work to the consumer in the form ofstd::packaged_task
objects, keeping hold of afuture
that shares state with each packaged_task. That way for every task posteed to the consumer there is a corresponding future, and a channel for getting the exception back
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:56
@JonathanWakelypackaged_task
?? I can't understand.. could you explain more?
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:08
I added another example to my answer, usingpackaged_task
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:14
add a comment |
Those answer suggest you to send exception_ptr
to main thread manually. That's not bad way, but I suggest you another way: std::promise
/ boost::promise
.
(Since I don't have boost in this computer now, so I'll go with std::promise
. However, there may be no big difference with boost.)
Look the example code:
#include <iostream>
#include <exception>
#include <thread>
#include <future>
#include <chrono>
void foo()
{
throw "mission failure >o<";
}
int main()
{
std::promise<void> prm;
std::thread thrd([&prm] {
try
{
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::seconds(5));
foo();
prm.set_value();
}
catch (...)
{
prm.set_exception(std::current_exception());
}
});
std::future<void> fu = prm.get_future();
for (int i = 0; ; i++)
{
if (fu.wait_for(std::chrono::seconds(1)) != std::future_status::timeout)
break;
std::cout << "waiting ... [" << i << "]n";
}
try
{
fu.get();
std::cout << "mission complete!n";
}
catch (const char *msg)
{
std::cerr << "exception: " << msg << "n";
}
thrd.join(); /* sorry for my compiler's absence of std::promise::set_value_at_thread_exit */
}
The benefit of this way is 1. you don't have to manage exceptions manually - std::promise
and std::future
will do everything and 2. you can use all feature around std::future
. In this case, I'm doing other things (outputing waiting...
message) while waiting the thread exit, through std::future::wait_for
.
Those answer suggest you to send exception_ptr
to main thread manually. That's not bad way, but I suggest you another way: std::promise
/ boost::promise
.
(Since I don't have boost in this computer now, so I'll go with std::promise
. However, there may be no big difference with boost.)
Look the example code:
#include <iostream>
#include <exception>
#include <thread>
#include <future>
#include <chrono>
void foo()
{
throw "mission failure >o<";
}
int main()
{
std::promise<void> prm;
std::thread thrd([&prm] {
try
{
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::seconds(5));
foo();
prm.set_value();
}
catch (...)
{
prm.set_exception(std::current_exception());
}
});
std::future<void> fu = prm.get_future();
for (int i = 0; ; i++)
{
if (fu.wait_for(std::chrono::seconds(1)) != std::future_status::timeout)
break;
std::cout << "waiting ... [" << i << "]n";
}
try
{
fu.get();
std::cout << "mission complete!n";
}
catch (const char *msg)
{
std::cerr << "exception: " << msg << "n";
}
thrd.join(); /* sorry for my compiler's absence of std::promise::set_value_at_thread_exit */
}
The benefit of this way is 1. you don't have to manage exceptions manually - std::promise
and std::future
will do everything and 2. you can use all feature around std::future
. In this case, I'm doing other things (outputing waiting...
message) while waiting the thread exit, through std::future::wait_for
.
edited Aug 13 '14 at 10:51
answered Aug 13 '14 at 10:41
ikh
6,37311853
6,37311853
1
The problem withpromise
is you can only use it once, the question shows catching exceptions in a loop, implying it needs to keep handling exceptions after the first
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:52
1
The way to do it withfuture
would be for the producer to pass work to the consumer in the form ofstd::packaged_task
objects, keeping hold of afuture
that shares state with each packaged_task. That way for every task posteed to the consumer there is a corresponding future, and a channel for getting the exception back
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:56
@JonathanWakelypackaged_task
?? I can't understand.. could you explain more?
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:08
I added another example to my answer, usingpackaged_task
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:14
add a comment |
1
The problem withpromise
is you can only use it once, the question shows catching exceptions in a loop, implying it needs to keep handling exceptions after the first
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:52
1
The way to do it withfuture
would be for the producer to pass work to the consumer in the form ofstd::packaged_task
objects, keeping hold of afuture
that shares state with each packaged_task. That way for every task posteed to the consumer there is a corresponding future, and a channel for getting the exception back
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:56
@JonathanWakelypackaged_task
?? I can't understand.. could you explain more?
– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:08
I added another example to my answer, usingpackaged_task
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:14
1
1
The problem with
promise
is you can only use it once, the question shows catching exceptions in a loop, implying it needs to keep handling exceptions after the first– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:52
The problem with
promise
is you can only use it once, the question shows catching exceptions in a loop, implying it needs to keep handling exceptions after the first– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:52
1
1
The way to do it with
future
would be for the producer to pass work to the consumer in the form of std::packaged_task
objects, keeping hold of a future
that shares state with each packaged_task. That way for every task posteed to the consumer there is a corresponding future, and a channel for getting the exception back– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:56
The way to do it with
future
would be for the producer to pass work to the consumer in the form of std::packaged_task
objects, keeping hold of a future
that shares state with each packaged_task. That way for every task posteed to the consumer there is a corresponding future, and a channel for getting the exception back– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:56
@JonathanWakely
packaged_task
?? I can't understand.. could you explain more?– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:08
@JonathanWakely
packaged_task
?? I can't understand.. could you explain more?– ikh
Aug 13 '14 at 11:08
I added another example to my answer, using
packaged_task
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:14
I added another example to my answer, using
packaged_task
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 11:14
add a comment |
In the worker thread, you can catch the exception, and then retrieve a std::exception_ptr
using std::current_exception
. You can then store this somewhere, pick it up in the main thread, and throw it with std::rethrow_exception
.
can you elaborate on how it is actually done?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
What do you mean?
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
I mean that what you said I have already read in several places but none really explains how to do it.
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:29
What do you mean "how to do it"? You get astd::exception_ptr
, pass it off to the main thread, and then rethrow it.
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:31
1
The same way you pass any object from one thread to another. There are various options, which is best depends on your requirements. Astd::queue<std::exception_ptr>
guarded by a mutex would be one way.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:05
|
show 1 more comment
In the worker thread, you can catch the exception, and then retrieve a std::exception_ptr
using std::current_exception
. You can then store this somewhere, pick it up in the main thread, and throw it with std::rethrow_exception
.
can you elaborate on how it is actually done?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
What do you mean?
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
I mean that what you said I have already read in several places but none really explains how to do it.
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:29
What do you mean "how to do it"? You get astd::exception_ptr
, pass it off to the main thread, and then rethrow it.
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:31
1
The same way you pass any object from one thread to another. There are various options, which is best depends on your requirements. Astd::queue<std::exception_ptr>
guarded by a mutex would be one way.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:05
|
show 1 more comment
In the worker thread, you can catch the exception, and then retrieve a std::exception_ptr
using std::current_exception
. You can then store this somewhere, pick it up in the main thread, and throw it with std::rethrow_exception
.
In the worker thread, you can catch the exception, and then retrieve a std::exception_ptr
using std::current_exception
. You can then store this somewhere, pick it up in the main thread, and throw it with std::rethrow_exception
.
answered Aug 13 '14 at 9:27
Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
5,0102041
5,0102041
can you elaborate on how it is actually done?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
What do you mean?
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
I mean that what you said I have already read in several places but none really explains how to do it.
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:29
What do you mean "how to do it"? You get astd::exception_ptr
, pass it off to the main thread, and then rethrow it.
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:31
1
The same way you pass any object from one thread to another. There are various options, which is best depends on your requirements. Astd::queue<std::exception_ptr>
guarded by a mutex would be one way.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:05
|
show 1 more comment
can you elaborate on how it is actually done?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
What do you mean?
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
I mean that what you said I have already read in several places but none really explains how to do it.
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:29
What do you mean "how to do it"? You get astd::exception_ptr
, pass it off to the main thread, and then rethrow it.
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:31
1
The same way you pass any object from one thread to another. There are various options, which is best depends on your requirements. Astd::queue<std::exception_ptr>
guarded by a mutex would be one way.
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:05
can you elaborate on how it is actually done?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
can you elaborate on how it is actually done?
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
What do you mean?
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
What do you mean?
– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:28
I mean that what you said I have already read in several places but none really explains how to do it.
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:29
I mean that what you said I have already read in several places but none really explains how to do it.
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 9:29
What do you mean "how to do it"? You get a
std::exception_ptr
, pass it off to the main thread, and then rethrow it.– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:31
What do you mean "how to do it"? You get a
std::exception_ptr
, pass it off to the main thread, and then rethrow it.– Robert Allan Hennigan Leahy
Aug 13 '14 at 9:31
1
1
The same way you pass any object from one thread to another. There are various options, which is best depends on your requirements. A
std::queue<std::exception_ptr>
guarded by a mutex would be one way.– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:05
The same way you pass any object from one thread to another. There are various options, which is best depends on your requirements. A
std::queue<std::exception_ptr>
guarded by a mutex would be one way.– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:05
|
show 1 more comment
Exceptions are synchronous. Which means there is no way to pass them between threads as exceptions. You cannot tell to any old thread "stop whatever you are doing and handle this". (Well you can if you deliver a POSIX signal to it, but that's not quite a C++ exception).
You can of course always pass an object with the exception data (as opposed to the state of being in an exception-handling mode) to another thread in the same way you would pass any other data between threads. A concurrent queue will do. Then you process it in the target thread. The target thread should be actively reading data from the queue.
add a comment |
Exceptions are synchronous. Which means there is no way to pass them between threads as exceptions. You cannot tell to any old thread "stop whatever you are doing and handle this". (Well you can if you deliver a POSIX signal to it, but that's not quite a C++ exception).
You can of course always pass an object with the exception data (as opposed to the state of being in an exception-handling mode) to another thread in the same way you would pass any other data between threads. A concurrent queue will do. Then you process it in the target thread. The target thread should be actively reading data from the queue.
add a comment |
Exceptions are synchronous. Which means there is no way to pass them between threads as exceptions. You cannot tell to any old thread "stop whatever you are doing and handle this". (Well you can if you deliver a POSIX signal to it, but that's not quite a C++ exception).
You can of course always pass an object with the exception data (as opposed to the state of being in an exception-handling mode) to another thread in the same way you would pass any other data between threads. A concurrent queue will do. Then you process it in the target thread. The target thread should be actively reading data from the queue.
Exceptions are synchronous. Which means there is no way to pass them between threads as exceptions. You cannot tell to any old thread "stop whatever you are doing and handle this". (Well you can if you deliver a POSIX signal to it, but that's not quite a C++ exception).
You can of course always pass an object with the exception data (as opposed to the state of being in an exception-handling mode) to another thread in the same way you would pass any other data between threads. A concurrent queue will do. Then you process it in the target thread. The target thread should be actively reading data from the queue.
answered Aug 13 '14 at 9:51
community wiki
n.m.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f25282620%2fcatching-exception-from-worker-thread-in-the-main-thread%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
7
Dear internet, you do not need to use
bind
withthread
. Just saym_thread = boost::thread(&WorkerThread::drawThread, this);
– Jonathan Wakely
Aug 13 '14 at 10:08
Thanks for the tip :)
– Michael IV
Aug 13 '14 at 10:46