Quick Q: Are std::threads run in the order they're created?--StackOverflow

By Jared Mulconry | Dec 3, 2014 09:47 PM | Tags: intermediate c++11

Quick A: There is no guarantee that threads will run in a given order.

Recently on SO:

Why don't these threads run in order?

When I run this code:

#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <mutex>

std::mutex m;

int main()
{
    std::vector<std::thread> workers;
    for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
    {
        workers.emplace_back([i]
        {
            std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(m);
            std::cout << "Hi from thread " << i << std::endl;
        });
    }

    std::for_each(workers.begin(), workers.end(), [] (std::thread& t)
    { t.join(); });
}

I get the output:

Hi from thread 7
Hi from thread 1
Hi from thread 4
Hi from thread 6
Hi from thread 0
Hi from thread 5
Hi from thread 2
Hi from thread 3
Hi from thread 9
Hi from thread 8

Even though I used a mutex to keep only one thread access at a time. Why isn't the output in order?

C++ STL for Embedded Developers--John Hinke

By Adrien Hamelin | Dec 3, 2014 02:13 PM | Tags: intermediate embedded

E.S.R. Labs presents its STL library adapted to embedded environments and discusses some of the choices they made for it:

C++ STL for Embedded Developers

by John Hinke

From the article:

C++ embedded programming is very difficult. There are some limitations that are not always present in traditional programming environments such as limited memory, slower processors, and older C++ compilers.

We have developed a set of best-practice processes and frameworks to support writing high-quality embedded applications...

A gotcha with Boost.Optional --Andrzej Krzemieński

By Razvan Pascalau | Dec 3, 2014 11:50 AM | Tags: boost basics

Have you used the Boost.Optional library? There is one thing you might need to keep an eye on as explained by Andrzej.

  A gotcha with Optional

  by Andrzej Krzemieński

From the article:

This post is about one gotcha in Boost.Optional library. When starting to use it, you might get the impression that when you try to put optional<T> where T is expected, you will get a compile-time error. In most of the cases it is exactly so, but sometimes you may get really surprised...

Quick Q: Is an acquire_release fence enough for Dekker synchronization?--StackOverflow

By Jared Mulconry | Dec 2, 2014 11:25 PM | Tags: c++11 advanced

Quick A: No, because acq_rel doesn't prevent reordering a store to x followed by a load from y... seq_cst does.

Recently on SO:

Why isn't a C++11 acquire_release fence enough for Dekker synchronization?

The failure of Dekker-style synchronization is typically explained with reordering of instructions. I.e., if we write

atomic_int X;
atomic_int Y;
int r1, r2;
static void t1() {
    X.store(1, std::memory_order_relaxed)
    r1 = Y.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
}
static void t2() {
    Y.store(1, std::memory_order_relaxed)
    r2 = X.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
}

Then the loads can be reordered with the stores, leading to r1==r2==0.

I was expecting an acquire_release fence to prevent this kind of reordering:

static void t1() {
    X.store(1, std::memory_order_relaxed);
    atomic_thread_fence(std::memory_order_acq_rel);
    r1 = Y.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
}
static void t2() {
    Y.store(1, std::memory_order_relaxed);
    atomic_thread_fence(std::memory_order_acq_rel);
    r2 = X.load(std::memory_order_relaxed);
}

The load cannot be moved above the fence and the store cannot be moved below the fence, and so the bad result should be prevented.

However, experiments show r1==r2==0 can still occur. Is there a reordering-based explanation for this? Where's the flaw in my reasoning?

C++ Has Become More Pythonic -- Jeff Preshing

By Daniel França | Dec 2, 2014 09:39 AM | Tags: python c++14 c++11

A nice article pointing out similarities between modern C++ and Python:

C++ Has Become More Pythonic

by Jeff Preshing

From the article:

C++ has changed a lot in recent years. The last two revisions, C++11 and C++14, introduce so many new features that, in the words of Bjarne Stroustrup, “It feels like a new language.”

It’s true. Modern C++ lends itself to a whole new style of programming – and you can’t help but feel Python’s influence on this new style. Ranged-based for loops, type deduction, vector and map initializers, lambda expressions. The more you explore modern C++, the more you find Python’s fingerprints all over it.

Was Python a direct influence on modern C++? Or did Python simply adopt a few common idioms before C++ got around to it? You be the judge...

Quick Q: How do I add elements to a 2D vector of ints?--StackOverflow

By Jared Mulconry | Dec 2, 2014 03:56 AM | Tags: basics

Quick A: Index into the desired sub-vector and call push_back.

Recently on SO:

Inserting elements into 2D vector

So I'm creating a class that implements an adjacency list. Currently in my class definition I initialized two vectors:

vector<vector<int>> adjList;
vector<int> neighbors;

and I declared two functions that I plan to use to make it:

bool constructAdjList();
bool insertIntoAdjList(int, int);

It's getting difficult wrapping my head around 2D vectors. I understand that it is essentially a vector of vectors, but I'm confused about how to insert a new value into one of the "subvectors". For example, I am able to create an adjacency list in createAdjList that is empty with the following loop:

for (int i = 0; i < numOfValues; i++){
    neighbors.push_back(0);
    adjList.push_back(neighbors);
    neighbors.clear();
}

But how can I say, push_back the value 5 to the 4th vector in adjList, which would be represented in my insertIntoAdjList function as

insertIntoAdjList(4, 5);

I know I can access a specific value in a 2D vector by saying adjList[4][1], but how can I push one onto it?

Thanks!

A quick poll about order of evaluation -- Herb Sutter

By Blog Staff | Dec 1, 2014 01:48 PM | Tags: None

A quick Monday poll:

A quick poll about order of evaluation...

by Herb Sutter

From the article:

Consider this program fragment:

std::vector<int> v = { 0, 0 };
int i = 0;
v[i++] = i++;
std::cout << v[0] << v[1] << endl;

My question is not what it might print under today’s C++ rules. The third line runs afoul of two different categories of undefined and unspecified behavior.

Rather, my question is what you would like the result to be. Please let me know... [click for poll]

Details About Some of the New C++ Language Features -- Kangyuan Niu

By Adrien Hamelin | Dec 1, 2014 01:09 PM | Tags: intermediate

A few days ago from the Visual Studio C++ blog:

Details About Some of the New C++ Language Features

by Kangyuan Niu

The article explains some new features to come in Visual Studio and, maybe more importantly, why they will come, their purpose. It talks about:

-- Terse Range-Based For Loops

-- Generalized Lambda Capture

-- Dining Philosophers

Quick Q: Are "++a" and "a = a.load() + 1" equivalent if 'a' is "atomic<int>"?--StackOverflow

By Jared Mulconry | Dec 1, 2014 01:57 AM | Tags: intermediate c++11

Quick A: No. Between a.load() and the addition and store to a is a window in which other threads can change the value of a, causing updates to be lost.

Recently on SO:

c++ atomic read/write misunderstanding

Why program with this code sometimes prints "2"?

int main() {
    std::atomic<int> a;
    a = 0;

    std::thread t1([&]{++a;});
    std::thread t2([&]{a++;});
    std::thread t3([&]{
        a = a.load() + 1;
    });

    t1.join();
    t2.join();
    t3.join();

    if (a != 3) {
        std::cout << "a: " << a << std::endl;
    }
}

I've thought std::atomic guarantees that all operations will be done atomically so writing here(incrementing) will use a memory barrier and we will have always "3" at the end of threads work. I've explored the code and found out that the problem thread is t3 but I can't understand why it is wrong.

ODE simulations with Boost.odeint and Boost.SIMD

By Meeting C++ | Nov 30, 2014 08:36 AM | Tags: intermediate boost advanced

A very nice article on how to use boost::odeint and SIMD:

Boosting ODE simulations with Boost.odeint and Boost.SIMD

by Mario Mulansky

From the article:

Ordinary Differential Equations appear in numerous applications and finding their solution is a fundamental problem in science and engineering. Often one has to rely on numerical methods to approximate such solutions as in the presence of nonlinearities, no analytic solution can be found. Being such a frequent problem...