understanding std::thread semantic with worker function as class member - c++

Question

To implement the logic when contructed object starts background thread for real work, I'm using a pattern like this (simplified):
class A {
std::thread t{&A::run, this};
std::atomic_bool done;
// variables are the question about
std::vector<std::thread> array_for_thread_management;
// ... and other members
protected:
void run() {
...
array_for_thread_management.push_back([](){...});
...
}
public:
A() = default;
// all other constructors deleted because of used
// some members like std::atomic_bool done;
~A() {
done = true;
bi::named_condition cnd{bi::open_only, "cnd"};
cnd.notify_one();
if (t.joinable())
t.join();
for(std::thread& worker : array_for_thread_management) {
if (worker.joinable()) worker.join();
}
}
};
If I'm adding a push of child threads in primary background thread into a vector in run() member, the object hangs on destructor.
even there is no real threads in a vector, just started this without connections from outside and try to stop this by destructor

Answer 1

Of course, once you have this pointer in your run method, you can access class members via this pointer. I guess the problem with your code is that the thread is spawned before any other members are initialized, as it is the first member in your class definition. I suspect with the following definition of class A you'll have no problems with accessing member variables:
class A {
std::atomic_bool done;
// variables are the question about
int i;
std::string s;
std::vector<std::string> v;
// and only after everything above is initialized:
std::thread t{&A::run, this}; // spawn a thread
// ...
}
However, personally I would prefer having a separate method start() which spawns a thread to spawning it inside class constructor implicitly. It may look like this:
class A
{
std::unique_ptr<std::thread> t;
std::atomic<bool> some_flag;
public:
void start()
{
t.reset(new std::thread(&A::run, this));
}
private:
void run()
{
some_flag.store(true);
}
};