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

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • 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 4542488
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 21, 20262026-05-21T15:23:52+00:00 2026-05-21T15:23:52+00:00

Is the following comparison an atomic action? I.e., can it be reduced to a

  • 0

Is the following comparison an atomic action? I.e., can it be reduced to a single CPU instruction?

char flag = 2;

for(;;)
{
    if (!flag) // <-- this
        break;

    // sleep
}

Here’s what I’m doing:

int main()
{
    sf::Mutex Mutex;
    char flag = 2;

    coordinatorFunction(flag);

    for(;;)
    {
        if (!flag)
            break;

        // sleep
    }
}

void workerFunction(void* a)
{
    char* p = static_cast<char*>(a);

    // work

    GlobalMutex.Lock();
    --*p;
    GlobalMutex.Unlock();
}

void coordinatorFunction(char& refFlag)
{
    sf::Thread worker1(&workerFunction, &refFlag);
    sf::Thread worker2(&workerFunction, &refFlag);

    worker1.Launch();
    worker2.Launch();
}
  • 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
    2026-05-21T15:23:53+00:00Added an answer on May 21, 2026 at 3:23 pm

    This is the wrong way to go about it.

    Your main thread is burning up CPU cycles as fast as it can, doing nothing but waiting for flag to reach zero. This test will fail every time it’s attempted, except the last one. Instead of doing it in this manner, use the “join” facility that your thread objects most likely have to make the main thread suspend itself until all the workers complete.

    This way, not coincidentally, you won’t care if the test is atomic because you will not need it at all.

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

Sidebar

Related Questions

Here's a puzzle for you. I want to change the following comparison method, so
The following code char buffer[BSIZE]; ... if(buffer[0]==0xef) ... Gives the compiler warning comparison is
In a java app, assuming I have option of choosing the following comparison methods
There is a following function that is supposed to make a comparison between 2
I'm getting the following error in my rails app: comparison of User with User
Each of the following two items contain the same string value but the comparison
I have read the following statement regarding to the comparison of C# value types
List<T>.Sort() method has 3 overloads. One of them is the following System.Collections.Generic.List<T>.Sort(System.Comparison<T>) On seeing
I'm getting the following warning Comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false
The following line of code gives a warning with Resharper: 'Comparison of floating point

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.