C++ Concurrency in Action: Practical Multithreading Errata

Page 17, third code snippet

The first line has an opening parenthesis following the [] lambda introducer rather than an opening brace. It should look like this:

std::thread my_thread([]({
    do_something();
    do_something_else();
});

Page 90, code snippet after 4th paragraph

The duration type used for printing the time taken is incorrect and won't compile. The use of std::chrono::seconds as the second template parameter is incorrect, and should be removed. The output statement should say:

std::cout<<"do_something() took "
<<std::chrono::duration<double,std::chrono::seconds>(stop-start).count()
<<" seconds"<<std::endl;

Page 120, listing 5.2

The listing uses std::milliseconds for the timeout. The time periods are in namespace std::chrono, so this should be std::chrono::milliseconds:

std::this_thread::sleep(std::chrono::milliseconds(1));
    

Page 154, listing 6.2

In the definition of push(), the value pushed on to the queue is of course new_value, not data. The second line should therefore read:

data_queue.push(std::move(new_valuedata));

Page 244, listing 8.2

The line indicated by the number 9 cueball is missing template parameters for accumulate_block. The line should read:

accumulate_block<Iterator,T>()(block_start,last,results[num_threads-1]);

Page 246, listing 8.3

The line indicated by the number 7 cueball is missing template parameters for accumulate_block. The line should read:

T last_result=accumulate_block<Iterator,T>()(block_start,last);

Page 247, code snippet

There are missing template parameters for accumulate_block after the for loop. The line should read:

T last_result=accumulate_block<Iterator,T>()(block_start,last);

Page 249, listing 8.4

There are missing template parameters for the direct call to accumulate_block on the 4th line of the listing on this page. The line should read:

T last_result=accumulate_block<Iterator,T>()(block_start,last);

Page 265, listing 8.11

There is a test for an empty range that returns last. However, this function has a void return type, so it should just be a plain return:

if(!length)
    return last;

Page 282, listing 9.5

In the while loop that waits for the new_lower result to be ready, the loop condition has a spurious !, which should be removed:

while(!new_lower.wait_for(std::chrono::seconds(0))==std::future_status::timeout)