Em seg 24 mar 2014, às 16:27:06, André Somers escreveu: > The point is, that usually you don't _need_ synchronization for this > purpose, and using synchronization does come at a cost. It is usually > not critical that the worker thread stops immediately when signalled, > just that it stops soon. So even if - due to missing synchronization and > the thread reading the flag at the same time it being changed - the > worker does an other iteration before stopping, nothing is lost. All > that happens is that the thread does a little bit of work that was not > needed. The bonus is that the rest of the time, no synchronization is > needed at all, which may result in better performance.
Note that using a regular, non-atomic variable could mean that the thread takes a LONG time to see the change, depending on the architecture and OS scheduling. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
