Blog Archives

Using Function Pointers for Callbacks in C++

You plan to call some function func1, and at runtime you need it to invoke another function func2. For one reason or another, however, you cannot simply hardcode the name of func2 within func1. func2 may not be known definitively at compile time, or perhaps func1 belongs to a third-party API that you can’t change and recompile. In either case, you need a callback function.

In a situation such as that shown in below code, a function pointer is a good idea if updateProgress and longOperation shouldn’t knowanything about each other. For example, a function that updates the progress by displaying it to the user—either in a user interface (UI) dialog box, in a console window, or somewhere else—does not care about the context in which it is invoked. Similarly, the longOperation function may be part of some data loading API that doesn’t care whether it’s invoked from a graphical UI, a console window, or by a background process.

The first thing you will want to do is determine what the signature of the function is you plan to call and create a typedef for it. typedef is your friend when it comes to function pointers, because their syntax is ugly. Consider howyou would declare a function pointer variable f that contains the address of a function that takes a single integer argument and returns a boolean. It would look like this:
bool (*f)(int); // f is the variable name
One could argue, convincingly, that this is no big deal and that I’m just a whiner. But what if you want a vector of such function pointers?
vector<bool (*)(int)> vf;
Or an array of them?
bool (*af[10])(int);
Function pointers do not look like ordinary C++ variable declarations whose format is often a (qualified) type name followed by a variable name. This is why they can make for messy reading.
Thus, in below code, I used a typedef like this:
typedef bool (*FuncPtrBoolInt)(int);

Once that was out of the way, I was free to declare function pointers that have the signature of returning bool and accepting a single integer argument as I would any other sort of parameter, like so:

void longOperation(FuncPtrBoolInt f) {
// …
Now, all longOperation needs to do is call f like it would any function:
f (l/1000000);
In this way, f can be any function that accepts an integer argument and returns bool. Consider a caller of longOperation that doesn’t care about the progress. It can pass in a function pointer of a no-op function:
bool whoCares(int i) {return(true);}
More importantly, which function to pass to longOperation can be determined dynamically at runtime.

#include <iostream>
// An example of a callback function
bool updateProgress(int pct)

std::cout << pct << "% complete...\n";

// A typedef to make for easier reading
typedef bool (*FuncPtrBoolInt)(int);
// A function that runs for a while
void longOperation(FuncPtrBoolInt f)

for (long l = 0; l < 100000000; l++)
if (l % 10000000 == 0)
f(l / 1000000);
int main( )

longOperation(updateProgress); // ok


Creating a Thread using C++ Boost Lib.

Creating a thread is deceptively simple. All you have to do is create a thread object on the stack or the heap, and pass it a functor that tells it where it can begin working. For this discussion, a “thread” is actually two things. First, it’s an object of the class thread, which is a C++ object in the conventional sense. When I am referring to this object, I will say “thread object.” Then there is the thread of execution, which is an operating system thread that is represented by the thread object. When I say “thread” , I mean the operating system thread. Let’s get right to the code in the example. The thread constructor takes a functor (or function pointer) that takes no arguments and returns void. Look at this line from below code,

boost::thread myThread(threadFun);
This creates the myThread object on the stack, which represents a new operating system thread that begins executing threadFun. At that point, the code in threadFun and the code in main are, at least in theory, running in parallel. They may not exactly be running in parallel, of course, because your machine may have only one processor, in which case this is impossible (recent processor architectures have made this not quite true, but I’ll ignore dual-core or above processors and the like for now). If you have only one processor, then the operating system will give each thread you create a slice of time in the run state before it is suspended. Because these slices of time can be of varying sizes, you can never be guaranteed which thread will reach a particular point first.
This is the aspect of multithreaded programming that makes it difficult: multithreaded program state is nondeterministic. The same multithreaded program, run multiple times, with the same inputs, can produce different output. Coordinating resources used by multiple threads is the subject of my next post.
After creating myThread, the main thread continues, at least for a moment, until it reaches the next line:
boost::thread::yield( );
This puts the current thread (in this case the main thread) in a sleep state, which means the operating system will switch to another thread or another process using some operating-system-specific policy. yield is a way of telling the operating system that the current thread wants to give up the rest of its slice of time. Meanwhile, the newthread is executing threadFun. When threadFun is done, the child thread goes away. Note that the thread object doesn’t go away, because it’s still a C++ object that’s in scope. This is an important distinction.
The thread object is something that exists on the heap or the stack, and works just like any other C++ object. When the calling code exits scope, any stack thread objects are destroyed and, alternatively, when the caller calls delete on a thread*, the corresponding heap thread object disappears. But thread objects are just proxies for the actual operating system threads, and when they are destroyed the operating system threads aren’t guaranteed to go away. They merely become detached, meaning that they cannot later be rejoined. This is not a bad thing. Threads use resources, and in any (well-designed) multithreaded application, access to such resources (objects, sockets, files, rawmemory, and so on) is controlled with mutexes, which are objects used for serializing access to something among multiple threads.

If an operating system thread is killed, it will not release its locks or deallocate its resources, similarly to how killing a process does not give it a chance to flush its buffers or release operating system resources properly. Simply ending a thread when you think it ought to be finished is like pulling a ladder out from under a painter when his time is up.
Thus, we have the join member function. As in below code, you can call join to wait for a child thread to finish. join is a polite way of telling the thread that you are going to wait until it’s done working:
myThread.join( );
The thread that calls join goes into a wait state until the thread represented by myThread is finished. If it never finishes, join never returns. join is the best way to wait for a child thread to finish. You may notice that if you put something meaningful in threadFun, but comment out the use of join, the thread doesn’t finish its work. Try this out by putting a loop or some long operation in threadFun. This is because when the operating system destroys a process, all of its child threads go with it, whether they’re done or not. Without the call to join, main doesn’t wait for its child thread: it exits, and the operating system thread is destroyed.

If you need to create several threads, consider grouping them with a thread_group object. A thread_group object can manage threads in a couple of ways. First, you can call add_thread with a pointer to a thread object, and that object will be added to the group. Here’s a sample:
boost::thread_group grp;
boost::thread* p = new boost::thread(threadFun);
// do something…

When grp’s destructor is called, it will delete each of the thread pointers that were added with add_thread. For this reason, you can only add pointers to heap thread objects to a thread_group. Remove a thread by calling remove_thread and passing in the thread object’s address (remove_thread finds the corresponding thread object in the group by comparing the pointer values, not by comparing the objects they point to). remove_thread will remove the pointer to that thread from the group, but you are still responsible for delete-ing it. You can also add a thread to a group without having to create it yourself by calling create_thread, which (like a thread object) takes a functor as an argument and begins executing it in a new operating system thread. For example, to spawn two threads in a group, do this:
boost::thread_group grp;
grp.create_thread(threadFun); // Now there are two threads in grp
grp.join_all( ); // Wait for all threads to finish
Whether you add threads to the group with create_thread or add_thread, you can call join_all to wait for all of the threads in the group to complete. Calling join_all is the same as calling join on each of the threads in the group: when all of the threads in the group have completed their work join_all returns.
Creating a thread object allows a separate thread of execution to begin. Doing it with the Boost Threads library is deceptively easy, though, so design carefully.

#include <iostream>
#include <boost/thread/thread.hpp>
#include <boost/thread/xtime.hpp>
struct MyThreadFunc

void operator( )( )

// Do something long-running...
} threadFun;
int main( )

boost::thread myThread(threadFun); // Create a thread that starts
// running threadFun

boost::thread::yield( ); // Give up the main thread's timeslice
// so the child thread can get some work
// done.
// Go do some other work...
myThread.join( ); // The current (i.e., main) thread will wait
// for myThread to finish before it returns