Consider this:
#include <boost/signals2.hpp>
#include <iostream>
struct object_with_slot
{
void operator()()
{
std::cout << "Slot called!" << std::endl;
member = 50500;
}
int member;
};
int main()
{
boost::signals2::signal<void ()> sig;
object_with_slot * ptr = new object_with_slot;
sig.connect(*ptr);
delete ptr;
sig();
}
Output is "Slot called!" and no crash or anything. That's why I have a few questions:
1) Why there is no crash?
2) Why there is no crash even if the slot function assigns something to object which doesn't exist?
3) How can I make the signal automatically track the lifetime of its slots? I mean when the slot is destroyed, it gets disconnected.
The question number 3 is the most important, as I need to implement observer pattern and very often lifetime of observers (slots) won't be static (for the whole time when app is running).
1) You're lucky. If not, you'll get a segmentation fault.
2) The memory was not overwritten in any way.
3) You could use slot::track to automatically disconnect when the tracked object gets deleted. Boost.Signals2 could track objects that are managed by boost::shared_ptr.
#include <boost/signals2.hpp>
#include <boost/shared_ptr.hpp>
struct object_with_slot
{
void operator()()
{
std::cout << "Slot called!" << std::endl;
member = 50500;
}
int member;
};
//
int main()
{
typedef boost::signals2::signal<void ()> sig_type;
sig_type sig;
{
boost::shared_ptr<object_with_slot> ptr(new object_with_slot);
sig.connect(sig_type::slot_type(*ptr).track(ptr));
// 'object_with_slot' managed by ptr is destroyed
}
sig(); // 'object_with_slot' not called here.
return 0;
}
UPDATE:
Added code to track objects for std::shared_ptr and std::weak_ptr:
#include <memory>
#include <boost/signals2.hpp>
// added specializations for std::weak_ptr and std::shared_ptr
namespace boost
{
namespace signals2
{
template<typename T> struct weak_ptr_traits<std::weak_ptr<T> >
{
typedef std::shared_ptr<T> shared_type;
};
template<typename T> struct shared_ptr_traits<std::shared_ptr<T> >
{
typedef std::weak_ptr<T> weak_type;
};
}
}
struct object_with_slot
{
void operator()()
{
std::cout << "Slot called!" << std::endl;
member = 50500;
}
int member;
};
//
int main()
{
typedef boost::signals2::signal<void ()> sig_type;
sig_type sig;
std::shared_ptr<object_with_slot> ptr(new object_with_slot);
sig.connect(sig_type::slot_type(*ptr).track_foreign(ptr)); // ptr is tracked
sig();
return 0;
}
1 and 2) In fact it is an undefined behaviour. You employed the dereference operator, now connect has the value of the object_with_slot, its address is free to be assigned by memory manager to any other process. By coincidence it is still a "valid address". And ptr is free to be assigned to any other value without cause memory leak.
Try something like this and you will see that explodes everytime
#include <boost/signals2.hpp>
#include <iostream>
struct object_with_slot
{
object_with_slot()
{
member = new int(10);
}
~object_with_slot()
{
delete member; //comment this line and everything works again
}
void operator()()
{
std::cout << "Slot called!" << std::endl;
*member = 50500; //it was destroyed above
}
int *member;
};
int main()
{
boost::signals2::signal<void ()> sig;
object_with_slot * ptr = new object_with_slot;
sig.connect(*ptr);
delete ptr;
ptr = 0x0;
sig();
}
3) You can put another signal on destructor of object_with_slot, then it can notify when it is called.
Very dangerous examples are given. Take a look:
#include <iostream>
#include <memory>
#include <boost/signals2.hpp>
struct object_with_slot
{
object_with_slot() {
std::cout << "ctor\n";
}
object_with_slot(const object_with_slot &) {
std::cout << "cctor\n";
}
~object_with_slot() {
std::cout << "dtor\n";
}
void operator()()
{
std::cout << "Slot called!" << std::endl;
member = 50500;
}
int member;
};
//
int main()
{
typedef boost::signals2::signal<void ()> sig_type;
sig_type sig;
std::shared_ptr<object_with_slot> ptr(new object_with_slot);
sig.connect(sig_type::slot_type(*ptr).track_foreign(ptr)); // ptr is tracked
sig();
return 0;
}
How do you think, what does this code out (g++ 4.8.1, libboost 1.54)?
ctor
cctor
cctor
cctor
cctor
cctor
cctor
cctor
cctor
dtor
dtor
dtor
dtor
dtor
cctor
dtor
cctor
dtor
dtor
dtor
cctor
dtor
Slot called!
dtor
dtor
I don't think, that this behaviour was expected. Because we pass copy (by value) of *ptr
(instance of object_with_slot
) to the connect
method. It might be solved, for example, by reference wrappers:
sig.connect(sig_type::slot_type(boost::ref(*ptr)).track_foreign(ptr)); // ptr is tracked
Be careful with templates and types.
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14882867/boostsignals2-descruction-of-an-object-with-the-slot