C++ SetConsoleCtrlHandler, passing data for cleanup without globals - c++

Question

I'm trying to check when the console is closed through the close button on Windows. I read about SetConsoleCtrlHandler and I thought I'd use that, but there's some cleanup I want to do in my main function. I'll make a small example describing what I want to do for my larger program.
BOOL CtrlHandler( DWORD fdwCtrlType )
{
switch( fdwCtrlType )
{
//Cleanup exit
case CTRL_CLOSE_EVENT:
bool* programIsOn = &???; //How do I pass the address to that variable in this function?
*programIsOn = false;
return( TRUE );
default:
return FALSE;
}
}
int main(){
MyObject obj = new MyObject();
bool programIsOn = true;
//How do I pass the address of programIsOn here?
if(!SetConsoleCtrlHandler( (PHANDLER_ROUTINE) CtrlHandler, TRUE )){
cout << "Could not set CtrlHandler. Exiting." << endl;
return 0;
}
while(programIsOn){
//...
}
//CLEANUP HERE
delete obj;
return 0;
}
I want to perform cleanup when my program closes via the console close event, however if I just close the console the main function doesn't terminate and is forced to stop. I thought of passing in programIsOn's address to the CtrlHandler callback but I have no idea how to do this without using a global variable.

Answer 1

TL;DR: Proper handling of this control signal is complicated. Don't bother with any 'clean-up' unless it's absolutely necessary.
The system creates a new thread (see the Remarks) in your application, which is then used to execute the handler function you registered. That immediately causes a few issues and forces you in a particular design direction.
Namely, your program suddenly became multi-threaded, with all the complications that brings. Just setting a 'program should stop' (global) boolean variable to true in the handler is not going to work; this has to be done in a thread-aware manner.
Another complication this handler brings is that the moment it returns the program is terminated as per a call to ExitProcess. This means that the handler should wait for the program to finish, again in a thread-aware manner. Queue the next complication, where the OS gives you only 10 seconds to respond to the handler before the program is terminated anyway.
The biggest issue here, I think, is that all these issues force your program to be designed in a very particular way that potentially permeates every nook and cranny of your code.
It's not necessary for your program to clean up any handles, objects, locks or memory it uses: these will all be cleaned up by Windows when your program exits.
Therefore, your clean-up code should consists solely of those operations that need to happen and otherwise wouldn't happen, such as write the end of a log file, delete temporary files, etc.
In fact, it is recommended to not perform such clean-up, as it only slows down the closing of the application and can be so hard to get right in 'unexpected termination' cases; The Old New Thing has a wonderful post about it that's also relevant to this situation.
There are two general choices here for the way to handle the remaining clean-up:
The handler routine does all the clean-up, or
the main application does all the clean-up.
Number 1 has the issue that it's very hard to determine what clean-up to perform (as this depends on where the main program is currently executing) and it's doing so 'while the engine is still running'. Number 2 means that every piece of code in the the main application needs to be aware of the possibility of termination and have short-circuit code to handle such.
So if you truly must, necessarily, absolutely, perform some additional clean-up, choose method 2. Add a global variable, preferably a std::atomic<bool> if C++11 is available to you, and use that to track whether or not the program should exit. Have the handler set it to true
// Shared global variable to track forced termination.
std::atomic<bool> programShouldExit = false;
// In the console handler:
BOOL WINAPI CtrlHandler( DWORD fdwCtrlType )
{
...
programShouldExit = true;
Sleep(10000); // Sleep for 10 seconds; after this returns the program will be terminated if it hasn't already.
}
// In the main application, regular checks should be made:
if (programShouldExit.load())
{
// Short-circuit execution, such as return from function, throw exception, etc.
}
Where you can pick your favourite short-circuiting method, for instance throwing an exception and using the RAII pattern to guard resources.
In the console handler, we sleep for as long as we think we can get away with (it doesn't really matter); the hope is that the main thread will have exited by then causing the application to exit. If not, either the sleep ends, the handler returns and the application is closed, or the OS became impatient and killed the process.
Conclusion: Don't bother with clean-up. Even if there is something you prefer to have done, such as deleting temporary files, I'd recommend you don't. It's truly not worth the hassle (but that's my opinion). If you really must, then use thread-safe means to notify the main thread that it must exit. Modify all longer-running code to handle the exit status and all other code to handle the failure of the longer-running code. Exceptions and RAII can be used to make this more manageable, for instance.
And this is why I feel that it's a very poor design choice, born from legacy code. Just being able to handle an 'exit request' requires you to jump through hoops.