Boost ASIO synchronous UDP client/server

If you know how to write an app that uses an ASIO TCP connection, you are close to know also how to do it on UDP.

Large part of the differences are taken care for us in ASIO, and we just have to use the socket as defined in boost::asio::ip::udp instead of its tcp counterpart.


First thing, we create a udp socket, that requires the ASIO I/O context and a udp endpoint, that needs as parameters the IP protocol to be used - version 4 or 6 - and the port - here I picked up 50013.
namespace ba = boost::asio;
namespace bs = boost::system;
using ba::ip::udp;
// ...

const unsigned short HELLO_PORT = 50'013;
// ...

void server(ba::io_context& io)
    udp::socket socket{ io, udp::endpoint{udp::v6(), HELLO_PORT} };
 // ...
Then we repeat how many times we like this block - in my tester I did it just once:
std::array<char, 0> recvData;  // 1
udp::endpoint endpoint;  // 2
bs::error_code error;  // 3
socket.receive_from(ba::buffer(recvData), endpoint, 0, error);  // 4
if (error)
 throw bs::system_error(error);  // 5

std::string message{ "UDP hello from ASIO" };

bs::error_code ec;
socket.send_to(boost::asio::buffer(message), endpoint, 0, ec);  // 6
1. In this buffer we store the message sent from the client. It has no use here, so it could be it even zero sized.
2. The endpoint, that will be used to sent the message to the client, is set by the socket receive_from() method, two lines below.
3. This error code is set by receive_from(), in case of problems.
4. The server wait synchronously here for the client. The three parameters are output ones. When the connection starts, the data coming from the client is put in the first parameter (here, an empty message is expected), the second parameter is filled with the client endpoint, the last one stores the possible error in the operation.
5. If receive_from() fails, throw the boost system error code relative exception, that is a standard runtime_error subclass.
6. Send the message to the client, using the endpoint as set by receive_from() and not specifying any flag. Any possible error code returned is disregarded.


The client function tries this code:
udp::resolver resolver{ io };
udp::endpoint destination = *resolver.resolve(udp::v6(), host, HELLO_PORT_STR).begin();  // 1

udp::socket socket{ io };;  // 2

std::array<char, 0> sendData;
socket.send_to(ba::buffer(sendData), destination);  // 3

std::array<char, 128> recvData;  // 4
udp::endpoint sender;
size_t len = socket.receive_from(ba::buffer(recvData), sender);

std::cout.write(, len);  // 5
1. Having instantiated a udp resolver on the previous line, we resolve() on it for the same IP protocol of the server - here I used version six - specifying its host and port. Since resolve() returns at least one endpoint or fails, we could safely access the first one dereferencing its begin() iterator.
2. We need an ASIO upd socket. Having created it on the previous line, passing the current ASIO I/O control, we open it for the required UDP version.
3. We start the communication with the server, sending an empty message - as nothing more is expected from it.
4. We'd better have enough room for the message coming from the server, the actual size of it is returned by the call to receive_from().
5. Let's see what we get, outputting it to the console.

Client and server are two free functions in the same C++ file that I pushed to GitHub. Passing no parameter to its main you run it as server, otherwise is a client.

This example is based on Daytime.4 and Daytime.5 from the official Boost ASIO tutorial.

Go to the full post

Boost ASIO TCP/IP asynchronous server

Having seen how simple is creating a synchronous ASIO TCP/IP server, let's see now how to create an asynchronous one.


The code for this example is divided in two classes, Server and Connection, described below. The example main function instantiates an ASIO io_context, uses it to instantiate a Server object, and then run() the I/O context.
namespace ba = boost::asio;
// ...

ba::io_context io;
Server server(io);;

The lower details of our code are here. Connection has as private data member an ASIO TCP/IP socket object on which we are going to write data to the client. Since we want to perform the write asynchronously, we use the ASIO async_write() function. This leads us to ensure that the current connection object is still alive when the write would actually be performed. To do that we'll pass to async_write() an instance of the connection object itself. To avoid a nightmarish memory management, we'll wrap it in a shared_ptr. However, to to that, we need to create a shared smart pointer from this, and to do that we have to enable the feature explicitly, deriving our class from the standard enable_shared_from_this:
class Connection : public std::enable_shared_from_this<Connection>
 tcp::socket socket_;
 std::string message_{ "Async hello from ASIO " };
 static int counter_;

// ...
The Connection ctor creates its member socket using the passed ASIO I/O context, and sets the message that we'll send to the client. Notice that the message has to be a Connection data member because we have to guarantee its liveliness until the asynchronous write is performed.
Connection(ba::io_context& io) : socket_(io)
 message_ += std::to_string(counter_++);
However, the ctor is private. The only way we want to let a Connection user to create an instance of this class is by wrapping it in a smart pointer, for the reason we described above, so, we have this static public method:
static std::shared_ptr<Connection> create(ba::io_context& io)
 return std::shared_ptr<Connection>(new Connection(io));
The writing is performed by this public method:
void start()
 ba::async_write(socket_, ba::buffer(message_),
  std::bind(&Connection::write, shared_from_this(), std::placeholders::_1, std::placeholders::_2));
ASIO async_write() requires an AsyncWriteStream, our socket, a ConstBufferSequence, that we create on the fly from our message, and a WriteHandler. This last parameter represent a function in which we can perform any further action after the normal write to socket as been done and before the connection to the client is closed. A free function with two parameters, a constant reference to a Boost error_code and a size_t, is expected, but bind() is here a helpful friend. I use both parameters, but we could easily get rid of them. More importantly, notice the use of shared_from_this(). Even if we don't want do anything in the WriteHandler, it is vital that the connection is kept alive till the end of writing. Keeping the "this" reference active here does the trick.


In the core of our server there is an ASIO TCP/IP acceptor, that is initialized by the ctor, and used by the Server start() function to accept - asynchronously - a connection from a client on a Connection object.
using ba::ip::tcp;
const int HELLO_PORT = 50013;
// ...

class Server
 tcp::acceptor acceptor_;
// ...
 Server(ba::io_context& io) : acceptor_(io, tcp::endpoint(tcp::v4(), HELLO_PORT))
// ...
The ctor calls the Server private method start(), that creates a new connection on the ASIO I/O context received from the main and stored in the acceptor. The socket owned by the connection is used in the async_accept() call on the acceptor, so that the server would wait for a client connection on it.
void start()
 ba::io_context& io = acceptor_.get_executor().context();
 std::shared_ptr<Connection> connection = Connection::create(io);
 tcp::socket& socket = connection->socket();
 acceptor_.async_accept(socket, std::bind(&Server::handle, this, connection, std::placeholders::_1));
As second parameter, async_accept() expects an ASIO AcceptHandler, a void free function that gets in input a constant reference to a boost system error code, we bind it to call the following Server private method:
void handle(std::shared_ptr<Connection> connection, const bs::error_code& ec)
 if (!ec)
If the handshake with the client worked fine, we use the connection to write - asynchronously - through the socket. Then we call again Server start(), to prepare the server to accept another connection.

This is more or less all. You could see the full C++ code on GitHub.

I have tested this server using the client described in the previous post. I found interesting adding here and there sleeps and printing to console to better observe how the process work. For more fun I'd suggest you to run more clients and let ASIO I/O control to run on a few threads, as shown in the strand example. The code is based on the official ASIO tutorial, Daytime.3 example.

Go to the full post

Boost ASIO synchronous exchange on TCP/IP

Let's build a simple synchronous client-server application based on the TCP/IP protocol using the Boost ASIO ip tcp socket. The server waits a connection on a port, as it comes, it writes a message and then terminate. The client connects to the server, reads its message from the socket, outputs it, and then it terminates too.


I have put both client and server in a single app, if no parameter is passed to the main, the process acts as server, otherwise as a client.
namespace ba = boost::asio;
// ...
const std::string HOSTNAME{ "localhost" };  // 1
// ...

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
 ba::io_context io;  // 1

 if (argc > 1)
  client(io, HOSTNAME);
1. Used by the client, when connecting to the server. In this simple example both server and client live on the same machine.
2. An io_context (also known as io_service, but that name is now deprecated) is the first requirement for almost anything in ASIO, so I create it as first thing, then is passed by reference to the client or server function, accordingly to the number of parameters passed to the program.


The following code in the server function throws exceptions deriving from std::exception to signal problems. Being this just an example, we just wrap it in a try-catch and output the relative message.
using ba::ip::tcp;
// ...
const int HELLO_PORT = 50013;
// ...

tcp::acceptor acceptor{ io, tcp::endpoint(tcp::v6(), HELLO_PORT) };  // 1

{   // 2
 tcp::socket socket{ io };  // 3
 std::cout << "Server ready" << std::endl;
 acceptor.accept(socket);  // 4

 std::string message{ "Hello from ASIO" };  // 5
 bs::error_code ec; // 6
 ba::write(socket, ba::buffer(message), ec);  // 7
1. Instantiate an object of the ASIO TCP/IP acceptor, so that we can listen for connections. We pass to it the ASIO io_context and a TCP endpoint, created specifying the version of the TCP/IP protocol to use (4 or 6) and the port to be used.
2. Here this block is executed just once. Convert it to a for loop for a more common behavior.
3. Each client connection requires a dedicated ASIO TCP/IP socket to be managed. Here it is created and, at the end of the block, exiting the scope, the socket dtor would clean it up.
4. The server sits down, waiting for a client to be served.
5. When the acceptor has accepted a client on the socket, the server wakes up and builds a message.
6. The ASIO write call in the next line requires an error code, to be set in case something goes wrong. We won't even check it here, usually this is not a good idea.
7. The message is converted to an ASIO buffer, so that it could be consumed by the ASIO write() to be written to the socket.


It mirrors the server, with the part of the acceptor taken by a resolver.
tcp::resolver resolver{ io };
tcp::resolver::results_type endpoints = resolver.resolve(host, HELLO_PORT_STR);  // 1

tcp::socket socket{ io };
ba::connect(socket, endpoints);  // 2

for (;;)  // 3
 std::array<char, 4> buf;  // 4
 bs::error_code error;
 size_t len = socket.read_some(ba::buffer(buf), error);  // 5

 if (error == ba::error::eof)  // 6
  break; // Connection closed cleanly by peer
 else if (error)
  throw bs::system_error(error);  // 7

 std::cout.write(, len);  // 8
 std::cout << '|';  // 9
std::cout << std::endl;
1. The resolver is resolved on the required host and port, returning a list of valid endpoints on them.
2. We call the ASIO connect() on the socket created in the line above, specifying the endpoints resolved in (1).
3. Let's loop until the full message is received from the server.
4. I have set the buffer size to a ridiculously low size, just for see it better at work.
5. read_some() data from the socket in the buffer.
6. If we reach end of file, the connection has been correctly completed.
7. Otherwise we interrupt the operation throwing the Boost system error we got.
8. Use the partial data received from the server.
9. This pipe character is put at the end of each chunk of data read only for seeing the effect on the read message.

Full C++ code is on GitHub. It is based on the Daytime.1 and Daytime.2 example from the official Boost ASIO tutorial.

Go to the full post

HackerRank DP: Coin Change

We are given in input a list of integers, and another integer that represents a total we should reach adding up how many elements from the passed list, each of them used 0+ times, with no upper limit. The name of the problem is slightly misleading, since the list could contain any positive integer, and we could not have almost any expectation them, besides being positive.
I'd say that is a version of the Partitions of Integers problem where a special condition is imposed on the integers that we can use.

You can find and solve this problem on HackerRank, section Cracking the Coding Interview.

First thing, I have taken a non completely trivial example and I studied it on paper.

Given in input [2, 5, 3, 6] and 10, it easy to see how the solution is 5:
2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2
5 + 5
2 + 3 + 5
3 + 3 + 2 + 2
2 + 2 + 6
The fact that it is marked as DP, should put me on the way of looking for a Dynamic Programming solution. So I create a table, reasoning how to fill it up coherently. Each column represents the totals I could get, ranging from 0 to the passed value. I have a column for each number passed in the input list, plus the topmost one, that represents the "no value" case.

Cell in position (0, 0) is set to 1, since I could get 0 from no value in just one way. The other values in the first row are set to zero, since I can't get that total having nothing to add up. We don't care much what it is in the other cells, since we are about to get the right value by construction.

We'll move in the usual way for a dynamic programming problem requiring a bidimensional table, row by row, skipping the zeroth one, from top to bottom, moving from left to right. We could have filled the first column before starting the procedure, since it is immediate to see that there is only one way to get a total of zero, whichever number I have at hand. Still, in this case it doesn't help to make the code simpler, so I just keep it in the normal table filling part.

For each cell what I have to do is:
  • copy the value from the cell above
  • if "cur", the current value associated to the row, is not greater than the current column index, add the value in the cell on the same row but "cur" times to the left
The first point should be clear. Maybe having a new number at hand would give us a new way to get the total, surely it won't reduce the alternatives we have already calculated.
The second point refers to the contribution of the new element. I guess the picture will help understand it.

The arrow pointing down from (0, 0) to (1, 0) means that since having no values leads to have one way to get a sum of zero, this implies that having no value and 2 still gives at least one way to get a sum of zero.
The other arrow pointing down, from (2, 8) to (3, 8) means that having one way to get 8 from no value and [2, 5] implies we still have at least one way to get it from no value and [2, 5, 3].
The arrow pointing left from (1, 0) to (1, 2) means that since we have a way to get zero having a 2, if we add a 2, we have a way to get 2 as a total.
The arrow pointing left from (3, 5) to (3, 8) means that having two ways of getting 5 using [2, 5, 3] implies that we still have two way of getting 5 + 3 = 8. Added with the one coming from the cell above, it explains why we put 3 in this cell.

Following the algorithm, I have written this python code here below:
def solution_full(denominations, total):  # 1
    table = [[0] * (total + 1) for _ in range(len(denominations) + 1)]  # 2
    table[0][0] = 1

    for i in range(1, len(denominations) + 1):  # 3
        for j in range(total+1):
            table[i][j] += table[i - 1][j]  # 4
            cur = denominations[i-1]
            if cur <= j:
                table[i][j] += table[i][j-cur]  # 5

    return table[-1][-1]  # 6
1. In the example, denominations is [2, 5, 3, 6] and total is 10.
2. Table has total + 1 columns and a row for each denomination, plus one. Its values are all set to zero, but the left-topmost one, set to 1.
3. Loop on all the "real" cells, meaning that I skip just the first row. I move in the usual way. Left to right, from the upper row downward.
4. The current cell value is initialized copying the value from the immediate upper one.
5. If there are enough cell to the left, go get the value of the one found shifting for the value of the current denomination, and add it to the one calculated in the previous step.
6. Return the value in the bottom right cell, that represents our solution.

How to save some memory

Writing the code, I have seen how there is no use in keeping all the rows. The only point where I use the values in the rows above the current one is in (4), and there I use just the value in the cell immediately above the current one. So I refactored the solution in this way:
def solution(denominations, total):
    cache = [0] * (total + 1)  # 1
    cache[0] = 1

    for denomination in denominations:  # 2
        for j in range(denomination, total+1):  # 3
            cache[j] += cache[j-denomination]
    return cache[-1]
1. The memoization here is done just in one row. Initialized as in the previous version.
2. Since I don't care anymore of the row index, I can just work directly on the denominations.
3. Instead of checking explicitly for the column index, I can start the internal loop from the first good position.

I pushed my python script with both solutions and a slim test case to GitHub.

Go to the full post

Boost ASIO Strand example

In the previous posts, we used ASIO keeping away from any possible multithreading issue, with the noticeable exception of
Asynchronous wait on timer, part two, where a job was executed concurrently to the ASIO handler in another thread, using of a mutex, a lock, and an atomic int to let it work as expected.

With ASIO we can follow a different approach, based on its strand concept, avoiding explicit synchronization.

The point is that we won't run the competing functions directly, but we will post the calls to a strand object, that would ensure they will be executed in a sequential way. Just be sure you use the same strand object.

We have a class, Printer, with two private methods, print1() and print2(), that uses the same member variable, count_, and printing something both to cout.

We post the two functions a first time in the class constructor, asking our strand object to run them.
namespace ba = boost::asio;
// ...

class Printer
// ...

ba::io_context::strand strand_;
int count_;

Printer(ba::io_context& io, int count) : strand_(io), count_(count)
{, this));, this));
The functions would post themselves again on the same strand, until some condition is satisfied.
void print1()
 if (count_ > 0)
  --count_;, this));
And this is more or less the full story for the Printer class. No need of synchronization, we rely on the strand to have them executed sequentially.

We still have to let ASIO run on two threads, and this is done by calling the run() method from io_context from two different threads. This is kind of interesting on its own, because we bump in an subtle problem due on how std::bind() is implemented.

The official Boost ASIO tutorial suggests to use the Boost implementation:
std::thread thread(boost::bind(&ba::io_context::run, &io));
It works fine, end of the story, one would say. But let see what it happens when using the standard bind implementation:
std::thread thread(std::bind(&ba::io_context::run, &io));
// error C2672: 'std::bind': no matching overloaded function found
// error C2783: 'std::_Binder<std::_Unforced,_Fx,_Types...> std::bind(_Fx &&,_Types &&...)': could not deduce template argument for '_Fx'
Damn it. It tries to be smarter than Boost, and in this peculiar case it doesn't work. The problem is that there are two run() functions in io_context, and bind() doesn't know which one to pick up.

A simple solution would be compile our code for a "clean" ASIO version, getting rid of the deprecated parts, as is the case of the run() overload.

If we can't do that, we should provide an extra help to bind, so that it could understand correctly the function type. An explicit cast would do:
auto run = static_cast<ba::io_context::count_type(ba::io_service::*)()>(&ba::io_context::run);
std::thread thread(std::bind(run, &io));
I have taken the address of the member function run from boost::asio::io_context (also known as io_service, but now it is deprecated too) and I explicitly casted it to its actual type.

Can we get the same result in a more readable way? Well, using a lambda could be an idea.
std::thread thread([&io] {; });
You could get my full C++ code from GitHub. I based it on the Timer.5 example from the official Boost ASIO tutorial.

Go to the full post

Boost ASIO using a member function as handler

In the fourth step of the official Boost ASIO tutorial, a class method in used as handler instead of the free function. See the previous post for my version that uses free function - or a lambda function. Here I present my refactored code that uses less Boost and more C++ standard stuff.

All the relevant code is now in the class Printer, so the function in the main thread gets much simpler:
Printer printer(io);;
Where io is a boost::asio::io_context object - previously known as io_service.

Here is the Printer class:
class Printer
 ba::system_timer timer_;
 int count_;
 Printer(ba::io_context& io) : timer_(io, sc::milliseconds(500)), count_(0)  // 1
  timer_.async_wait(std::bind(&Printer::print, this));

 ~Printer()  // 2
  std::cout << "final count is " << count_ << std::endl;

 void print()  // 3
  if (count_ < 5)
   std::cout << count_++ << ' ';
   timer_.expires_at(timer_.expiry() + sc::milliseconds(500));
   timer_.async_wait(std::bind(&Printer::print, this));
1. The constructor initializes the member variables and then asks ASIO to set an asychronous wait on the timer, passing as handler the member function print() of this object.
2. The dtor will print the final counter value.
3. Same old print() function, but now is a method of Printer, so it could freely access its data members.

This approach looks cleaner of the free function one. Still, we need to keep in our mind the fact that timer_, count_ (and cout) are seen by two different threads, and this could lead to concurrency problems, that could be solved using mutexes and locks, as I have shown in a previous spoilery post, or using the ASIO concept of strand, as we'll see in the next post.

Go to the full post

Boost ASIO passing parameters to handler

I have sort of spoiled the argument of this post in the previous one, where the focus was on telling ASIO to asynchronously run a function when a timer expires, but I couldn't keep from presenting also a scenario where multiple threads synchronize on a flag and access concurrently a shared resource. Let's do a step beyond, and analyze a simpler case, where the function we want ASIO to run at the timer expiration just has to access a variable defined in the main thread.

Plain function

The point raised in the official Boost ASIO tutorial is having a simple function passed to ASIO so that after it is called the first time, on timer expirations, it resets the timer on itself, keeping track on the times it has been invoked in a counter defined in the main thread. Here is my version of it, with some minor variation.
namespace ba = boost::asio;
namespace sc = std::chrono;

// ...

void print(ba::system_timer* pTimer, int* pCount) {  // 1
 if (*pCount < 5)  // 2
  std::cout << (*pCount)++ << ' ';
  pTimer->expires_at(pTimer->expiry() + sc::milliseconds(500));  // 3
  pTimer->async_wait(std::bind(print, pTimer, pCount));  // 4
1. I use system_timer, based on the standard chrono::system_clock, instead of the boost::posix_time based deadline_timer.
2. The check on the counter is used to avoid an infinite series of calls.
3. Reset the timer expiration to half a second in the future. To get the current expiration time I use expiry() instead of the deprecated overaload with no parameters of expires_at().
4. Reset an asychronous wait on the timer, passing as parameter the function itself.

Notice how the standard bind() function is used to bind the print() function to the handler expected by async_wait() on the timer. This makes possible to elide the reference to boost::system::error_code, that we decided not to use here, and add instead the two parameters we actually need.

In the main thread we start the asychronous wait on the ASIO managed timer in this way:
// ...

int count = 0;
ba::system_timer timer(io, sc::milliseconds(500));  // 1

timer.async_wait(std::bind(print, &timer, &count));  // 2;  // 3
1. io is a boost::asio::io_context object - previously known as io_service.
2. Notice that both count and timer are shared between the main thread and the one owned by ASIO in which is going to be executed print().
3. However, nothing happens in the main thread until ASIO ends its run().

The code is so simple that we can guarantee it works fine. However, when between (2) and (3), another thread is spawned, with something involving io and timer (and cout, by the way) we should be ready to redesign the code for ensure thread safety.

Same, with lambda

Usually, I would feel more at ease putting the code above in a class, as I did in the previous post. Still, one could argue that in a simple case like this one, that could be kind of an overkill. Well, in this case I would probably go for a lambda implementation, that at least would keep the code close, making less probable forgetting something in case of future refactoring.

Since I could capture count and timer instead of passing them to the lambda, there is no need of custom binding here. However, the original function needs to use its name in its body, and this is something that C++ lambdas are not allowed to do. There are a couple of workaround available, I have chosen to save it as a local std::function variable, and then pass it to async_wait() like this:
// ...
std::function<void(const bs::error_code&)> print = [&](const bs::error_code&) {
 if (count < 5)
  std::cout << count++ << ' ';
  timer.expires_at(timer.expiry() + sc::milliseconds(500));


I have pushed the two new files, free function and lambda example, on GitHub.

Go to the full post

Boost ASIO asynchronous wait on timer

Having seen how ASIO takes care of resources, now we are ready for something a bit more spicy, setting up an asynchronous wait.

Plain example

Firstly, I have faithfully followed the Timer.2 Boost ASIO tutorial, only using standard C++ construct instead of the Boost counterpart.

We want ASIO to run in another thread the following simple function, that just does some output, and we want it to be done after a certain delay.
namespace bs = boost::system;

// ...

void hello(const bs::error_code& ec)  // 1
 std::cout << "delayed hello [" << ec.value() << "] " << std::flush;
1. If ASIO completes the wait on the timer correctly, it passes an error code with value zero.

namespace ba = boost::asio;
namespace sc = std::chrono;

// ...

void timer2(ba::io_context& io)  // 1
 std::cout << "2) Starting ... " << std::flush;

 ba::system_timer timer{ io, sc::seconds(1) };  // 2
 std::cout << "hello " << std::flush;;  // 3
 std::cout << "done" << std::endl;
1. The old io_service is now deprecated, get used to see io_context in its place.
2. Create a system timer on ASIO, setting its expire time to one second. Then start a non-blocking wait on it, passing the address of above defined hello() function as parameter.
3. After doing some job on the current thread, here just a print on the output console, we want to wait for the termiantion of the other thread, controlled by ASIO. So we call its run() method, blocking until we get back the control.

More action

Let's add some meat to the above example. Say that we want to run a loop in the main thread until a timeout expires.
class MyJob
 MyJob(const MyJob&) = delete;  // 1
 const MyJob& operator=(const MyJob&) = delete;

 std::mutex mx_;  // 2
 std::atomic<bool> expired_;  // 3
 MyJob() : expired_(false) {}

 void log(const char* message)
  std::unique_lock<std::mutex> lock(mx_);  // 4
  std::cout << message << std::flush;

 void timeout()  // 5
  expired_ = true;

 void operator()()  // 6
  for (int i = 0; !expired_; ++i)
   std::ostringstream os;
   os << '[' << i << ']';

1. The objects of this class are inherently non-copyable. So I remove copy ctor and assignment operator from its interface.
2. The output console is shared between two threads. This mutex is going to rule its access.
3. The threads are going to synchronize on a boolean. At startup it is set to false. When the timer expires set it to true. The main loop runs until it sees an expiration. Being just one thread setting it, while the other only reading it, an atomic boolean would be enough to ensure communication between threads.
4. Lock the mutex to acquire exclusive access to the shared resource.
5. This method is going to be called by the timer on expiration.
6. The loop I want to run until timer expiration.

Let's see how I used this class.
void timer2a(ba::io_context& io)
 std::cout << "2a) Starting ... " << std::flush;

 ba::system_timer timer(io, sc::seconds(1));

 MyJob job;
 timer.async_wait([&job](const bs::error_code&) { job.timeout(); });  // 1
 std::thread thread(std::ref(job));  // 2;
1. The async_wait() method of the timer is fed with a lambda that capture by reference the instance of the class MyJob that I created in the previous line. In the lambda body we call the job timeout() method. The result is that the expiration flag is set when the timeout expires. Here I ignore the ASIO error code, but it would be easy to take notice of it, when required.
2. Create a new thread to run the job loop.

One thing more. I want to run the two examples, one after the other, using the same ASIO io_context object. But the first one run() it, putting it in the stopped status. No problem, I just have to remember to reset it. That is what I do in the main:


I have pushed both C++ source files on GitHub, the simpler, and the more interesting one.

Go to the full post

Boost ASIO Basic Skills

In the latest years there have been a few changes in the ASIO library, and I finally decided to review the post I have produced on it. I have downloaded the (currently) latest Boost libraries, version 1.66 (please have a look the Boost Revision History for details) and I am about to use it on a WIndows box with Visual Studio 2017 as IDE with the current (March 2018) Visual C++ programming language implementation.

In this and the next few posts, I plan to follow the Boost ASIO tutorial, basic skills section.

Notice that a few well established ASIO elements are now marked as deprecated. Define BOOST_ASIO_NO_DEPRECATED among the compiling option to get rid of them. I kept a more conservative approach, however, simply avoiding deprecations whenever I saw them.

First victim is a big one, io_service. Luckily it looks like the solution is just using io_context instead.

This led to the main change in the code for my version of the Timer.1 tutorial.

Its point is using ASIO to set a synchronous timer to block the current thread execution for a while. This is not very interesting, but shows the common pattern we are about to use to let ASIO know about a service we want it to manage on our behalf.
namespace ba = boost::asio;
namespace sc = std::chrono;

// ...

void timer1(ba::io_context& io)
 std::cout << "1) Starting ... " << std::flush;

 ba::system_timer timer{ io, sc::seconds(1) };  // 1
 timer.wait();  // 2

 std::cout << "done!" << std::endl;
1. I am creating an ASIO service, system timer, setting its delay to one second.
2. I consume the service synchronously, blocking the current thread execution.

I have used here system_timer, equivalent to the deadline_timer used in the official example, differing from it that is based on the standard C++ chrono library, instead of the boost equivalent one. If you need a steady clock, use steady_timer.

I have pushed the reviewed code for this example on GitHub. I have added a main in an another file, that would run all the examples in this section.

Go to the full post

Partitioning Souvenirs

Given a list of integers, we want to know if there is a way to split it evenly in three parts, so that the sum of each part is the same than the other ones.

Problem given in week six of the edX MOOC Algs200x Algorithmic Design and Techniques by the UC San Diego.

This 3-partition problem is not too different from the classic 2-partition one, for which I have described the well known dynamic programming solution in the previous post. As before, we build a table where the rows represents the sums we want to get and the columns the elements in the collection we are about to consider.
However, we have to change a bit the meaning of the value that we push in each cell. This time we check two of the three tentative subcollections, and we want to keep track of how many of them could have as sum the row index, given the elements of the input list available in that column.

Consider as example this input:
[3, 1, 1, 2, 2]
We are looking for three subcollections having all a sum of three. The table is having six columns and four rows, including a first dummy one. We initialize all its cells to zero, and we loop on all the "real" cells applying rules close to the ones we have seen for the 2-partition problem, with slight variations.
(a) If the column element matches the row index, I increase the value of the left-hand cell, up to reach 2.
(b) If there is not a match, but the column element added to the previous one matches it, I still increase the value of the left-hand cell, up to reach 2.
(c) Otherwise, I copy the value in the left-hand cell to the current one.
The result should be reflected by this table:
And the answer to the original question is yes only if the bottom-left value in the table is two.

Here is my python code to implement this algorithm.
def solution(values):
    total = sum(values)
    if len(values) < 3 or total % 3:  # 1
        return False
    third = total // 3
    table = [[0] * (len(values) + 1) for _ in range(third + 1)]  # 2

    for i in range(1, third + 1):
        for j in range(1, len(values) + 1):  # 3
            ii = i - values[j - 1]  # 4
            if values[j - 1] == i or (ii > 0 and table[ii][j - 1]):  # 5
                table[i][j] = 1 if table[i][j - 1] == 0 else 2
                table[i][j] = table[i][j - 1]  # 6

    return True if table[-1][-1] == 2 else False
1. If dividing the sum of values by three I get a remainder, or if there are less than three elements in the list, for sure there is no way of 3-partition my list.
2. Build the table as discussed above. Note the zero as default value, even in the dummy top row - it is not formally correct, but those values are not used anywhere.
3. Loop on all the "real" cells.
4. Precalculate the row for the (b) check described above.
5. The first part of the condition is the (a) check above. If it fails, we pass to the second part, using the row calculate in (4). If one of the two conditions is true, the value of the current cell is increased up to 2.
6. Vanilla case, moving to the right we keep the value already calculate for the previous cell.

It looks easy, once one see it, doesn't it?

I pushed my python code and a few test cases to GitHub.

Go to the full post

2-partition problem

Having a list of integers, we want to know if we can split it evenly in two parts.

There is a well known, elegant and relatively fast dynamic programming solution to this problem.

Say that this is the list list
[3, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1]
Being the sum of its elements ten, we'll have a positive answer to the problem if we could find a subcollection with a sum of five.

To check it, we build a table having rows from zero to the sum of the subcollection we are looking for - five in this case. Actually, the zeroth row is pretty useless here, I kept it just because it makes indices less confusing in the code. The columns represents the partial sum of elements in the list we have in input, column zero is for the empty collection, one contains just the first element (3 in the example), column two the first two items (3 and 1 here), up to the last one that keep all.

The content in each cell is the answer to the question: is there a combination of elements in the subcollection specified by the column that have a sum specified by the row?

So, for instance, table[2][3] means: could I get 2 as a sum from [3, 1, 1]? The answer is yes, because of latter two elements.

The bottom-right cell in the table is the answer for the original problem.

Let's construct the table. Whatever I put in the topmost row is alright, since I won't use it in any way. They would represent the answer to the question if I could get a sum zero from a collection that could be empty (leftmost cell) up to including all the element in the original input (rightmost cell). Logically, we should put a True inside each of them but, since we don't care I leave instead a bit misleading False. Forgive me, but this let me initialize with more ease the table, considering that each first cell in any row (but the zeroth one) should be initialized with False, since it is impossible having a sum different from zero from an empty collection.

Now let's scan all the cell in the table, from (1, 1) to the bottom-right one, moving from left to right, row by row.
It the currently added element in the list has the same value of the row index (that is, the total we are looking for), we can put a True in it.
If the cell on the immediate left contains a True, we can, again, safely put a True in it. Adding an element to the collection won't change the positive answer we already get.
If the first two checks don't hold, I try to get the total adding up the current value to the previous one. If so, bang, True again.

At the of looping, we should get a table like the one here below.
(a) The cell (1, 2) is set to True because the column represent the subcollection {3,1}, having as latest element the row index.
(b) The cell (1, 4) is True because (1, 3) is True
(c) The cell (4, 2) is True because of cell (3, 1), checked because being the left adjacent column, moving up 1 (from the latest element in current subcollection {3,1}).

Checking the bottom-right cell we have a True, so the answer to our original question is yes.

Here is my python implementation of this algorithm:
def solution(values):
    total = sum(values)  # 1
    if total % 2:
        return False

    half = total // 2
    table = [[False] * (len(values) + 1) for _ in range(half + 1)]  # 2

    for i in range(1, half + 1):
        for j in range(1, len(values) + 1):  # 3
            if values[j-1] == i or table[i][j-1]:  # 4
                table[i][j] = True
            else:  # 5
                ii = i-values[j-1]
                if ii > 0 and table[ii][j-1]:
                    table[i][j] = True

    return table[-1][-1]  # 6
1. If the sum of values is not an even number, we already know that the list can't be split evenly.
2. Build the table as described above. Don't pay attention to the topmost row, it's just a dummy.
3. Loop on all the "real" cell, skipping the leftmost ones, that are left initialized to False.
4. See above, case (a) and (b) as described and visualized in the picture
5. This code implements the case (c). I get the the tentative row index in ii. If the relative cell on the left adjacent column is available and it is set to True, the current cell is set to True too.
6. Get the solution to the problem.

I pushed my python code and a few test cases on GitHub.

Go to the full post

Other Dynamic Programming problems

Sixth and last week of the edX MOOC Algs200x Algorithmic Design and Techniques by the UC San Diego, again on Dynamic Programming. Just three problems, fully described in this pdf.

The first one, named "Maximum Amount of Gold", states that you have a bag of given capacity, and you see n gold bars of (possibly) different weights. Push as much gold as you can in the bag.

It is easy to say that it is a variation on the classic 0/1 knapsack problem. Here the bars have all the same unitary value, so we just need to know their weight to build our solution. Not much sweat to solve it, anyway I pushed to GitHub first a python script to solve the generic problem, then one tailored on the specific requirements of the problem.

Much more challenging the other two problems. "Partitioning Souvenirs" is a 3-Partition problem. Before solving it, I practiced with the more common 2-partition version. "Maximizing the Value of an Arithmetic Expression" is well described, step by step, in the course, and I guess that I solved it easily only because of this intensive training. You could see my python implementation on GitHub.

Go to the full post