Howard Hinnant wrote: > On Saturday, June 28, 2003, at 06:32 PM, Philippe A. Bouchard wrote: > >> Thanks... but is it possible to obtain the initial address of the >> functor >> object portably, given the current thread object? > > To the best of my knowledge, no. As currently designed the thread > constructor is not required to record (remember) the starting function. > > Such a requirement could impose constraints on the implementation that > would prohibit desirable optimizations, so we should not add this > without sufficient motivation.
Ah... ok. What I was looking for was to gather information for each specific thread about their heap usages. A thread oriented implementation would allow synchronized information without using mutexes. > Specifically, with the current > interface it is possible to implement the thread(f) constructor such > that it does not need to access the heap if the type of f is a simple > function pointer. However, if the thread is required to store f, then > I suspect such an optimization would no longer be practical. > > Just shooting from the hip, one might be able to build a > hash_map<thread, function<void()> > (<cough> excuse me, that's > unordered_map<thread, fucntion<void()> >) to achieve such functionality > if desired. However, I haven't actually prototyped that idea, so I > can't swear it would work at this point. Ok, I see. -- Philippe A. Bouchard _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
