Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 3359354
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 18, 20262026-05-18T02:51:43+00:00 2026-05-18T02:51:43+00:00

I’m using the Concurrency Runtime with Visual C++ 2010, and am interested in the

  • 0

I’m using the Concurrency Runtime with Visual C++ 2010, and am interested in the capabilities of parallel_invoke and task_group (parts of the PPL or Parallel Patterns Library). I’d like to be able to start two parallel actions via function objects (rather than lambda functions or function pointers), but I can’t get the code to compile, because of an error:

error C3848: expression having type 'const C' would lose some const-volatile qualifiers in order to call 'void C::operator ()(void)'

But if I make the C::operator()() const, then I lose a lot of the benefits of a function object, namely, that its state is mutable and maintained internally between calls. Am I missing something here? Is there a way that I could invoke non-const function objects in parallel?

BTW, I realize that I could use the Asynchronous Agents Library, and derive the classes from the Concurrency::agent class, but please consider that beyond the scope of this question (in part due to the lack of exception handling and cancellation options).

I’m just interested in what I can do with the PPL, and while there are examples with lambda functions and function pointers, I couldn’t find or create any examples with function objects that do more than a parallel “Hello World”. I’m looking for something that really takes advantage of function objects, and, if possible, also concurrent containers.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-18T02:51:43+00:00Added an answer on May 18, 2026 at 2:51 am

    The functors are required to be immutable because when they are scheduled via parallel_invoke and task_group::run they are copied and the potential for race conditions during state accumulations is high. Particularly with task_group::run the lifetime of the task has the potential to outlive where the task was declared (i.e. you declare it on the stack and the stack exits but the task hasn’t run yet)

    The simplest technique that can be used to work around this is to capture the functor by reference in a lambda (yes I know you said that you didn’t want to use lambdas directly).

       NonConstFunctor func;
       Concurrency::task_group tasks;
       // c3848
       //tasks.run(func);
       //work around this by capturing func by reference
       tasks.run([&func](){func();});
    

    You can also use the ‘lightweight task’ facilities of the scheduler class (see Scheduler::ScheduleTask) which doesn’t require const since it has a typical void* API.

    You’ll need to build a wrapper function to handle this, but this is straightforward and there is one in the sample pack at http://code.msdn.com/concrtextras

    -Rick

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

No related questions found

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.