How to extract Invoke call to a method with a lambda parameter - c#

I am finding myself writing a lot of these to update the UI thread from a BackgroundWorker (_instance being a reference to the Main class):
_instance.Invoke((Action)(() =>
{
_instance.DgvResults.DataSource = Results;
_instance.LblStatus.Text = #"Done!";
}));
I would like to extract this block to a method so I can call it like this :
RunOnUIThread(() => _instance.DgvResults.DataSource = Results);
In other words the goal is to be able to pass a lambda containing the instruction I want to run on the UI thread to this method. I've been able to do this in Java but I'm quite new to C# still and not sure how to tackle this. Any guidance would be appreciated.

I'm not sure this is what you want, but I think you can use event delegate.
// In UI-related code
public event Action UpdateUI;
And you can add lambdas you want to be called when something has changed.
// Other codes
_uiCode.UpdateUI += () => _instance.DgvResults.DataSource = Results;
// More other codes
_uiCode.UpdateUI += () => UpdateSomethingTopPanel();
_uiCode.UpdateUI += () => UpdateSomethingBelow();
...
And call these functions via one-line code:
// If nothing has added to event, invoking would cause nullref,
// so we have to check null.
UpdateUI?.Invoke();
But be careful, adding something to event doesn't check duplicate member. You have to call above code only once.

Related

Subscribe to an Action event with a different return type method

I have an event:
public event Action OnDamageTaken;
I'd like to subscribe to it in my behavior tree, but with a return type of TaskStatus, which when evaluated to TaskStatus.Success, would end current Task execution in the tree, like so:
Vegetation.OnDestroy += VegetationDestroyed;
public TaskStatus VegetationDestroyed()
{
Owner.FindTask<JobChooser>().CurrentJob.OnJobCompleted();
return TaskStatus.Success;
}
However, I get the following error:
Is something like this possible to do, and if not, why? I thought since the Action event passes no arguments, therefore, we can subscribe with a method that has any return type, as long as that method too requires no parameters.
You can wrap the method inside a lambda:
Vegetation.OnDestroy += () => VegetationDestroyed();
If you want to unsubscribe again from the event, you have to store the lambda inside a variable:
Action onDestroy = () => VegetationDestroyed();
Vegetation.OnDestroy += onDestroy;
Vegetation.OnDestroy -= onDestroy;
Online demo: https://dotnetfiddle.net/AOYqbf

How to best avoid memoryleaks when using UnityActions or C# Actions

Ok, I am working with public static UnityActions for event driven multi delegate execution and I want to avoid memory leaks. I am worried that I miss removing a registered delegate. So I came up with the following construct:
Immediately when registering for an event I also register the command for unregistering to a separate action that I can execute at the end of the program like so:
// first establish a delegate to collect everything we need to de-register later OnDestroy
private delegate void Dreg();
private Dreg dreg;
// register for the event and create an entry in the de-register list
//for later execution:
MyEvents.SomeEvent += HandleSomeEvent;
dreg += () => { MyEvents.SomeEvent -= HandleSomeEvent; };
At the end of the application I just need to invoke "dreg" to clear all registrations. This si working fine so far.
My question is: Can I wrap these two statements more elegantly into a function so that I just have to issue one statement instead of two? I have tried but I fail in the assignments.
My experiment looked something like this:
public static void RegisterForEvent(UnityAction _eventToRegisterFor, UnityAction _thingToAdd)
{
_eventToRegisterFor += _thingToAdd;
dreg += () => _eventToRegisterFor -= _delegateToAdd;
}
...
...Register(MyEvents.SomeEvent,HandleSomeEvent);// using this to register
...
...dreg.invoke;//near the end of the application to de-register everything
This does not seem to be possible.
My problem seems to be that I don't quite understand, what type "thingToAdd" actually is that I am assigning to MyEvents.SomeEvent? Is that a delegate? Is it a string that is resolved at runtime? is it a function??
I tried to work with C# Actions as well but did not succeed with that either.
Any suggestions will be much appreciated! Many thx before hand :-)
Here is the way I solved this:
//---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
public static void RegisterForEvent(UnityAction _eventToRegisterFor, UnityAction _handlerToAdd)
{
_eventToRegisterFor += _handlerToAdd;
dreg += () => _eventToRegisterFor -= _handlerToAdd;
}
//---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
//...the two lines above could be replaced with this one line call...
RegisterForEvent(MyEvents.SomeEvent,HandlerForSomeEvent);
//---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
//...and at the end the invokation of "dreg" will clear the event delegates
private void OnDestroy()
{
dreg.invoke;//near the end of the application to de-register everything
}

Passing statement lambda as parameter

After following this question on updating a GUI from another thread I wanted to extend the code slightly so that it worked for something other than property assignment. Specifically I was trying to find a way to assign some functionality directly to a lambda so that I can define the behavior as needed (I modified the original slightly for WPF):
private delegate void UpdateControlThreadSafeDelegate(Control control, System.Linq.Expressions.Expression<Action> property);
public void UpdateControl(Control control, System.Linq.Expressions.Expression<Action> property)
{
// If calling thread is not associated with control dispatcher, call our thread safe property update delegate
if (!control.Dispatcher.CheckAccess())
{
control.Dispatcher.Invoke(new UpdateControlThreadSafeDelegate(UpdateControl), new object[] { control, property });
}
else
{
Action call = property.Compile();
call();
}
}
With usage:
UpdateControl(lbFoo, () => lbFoo.Items.Clear()); // where lbFoo is a ListBox control
This works fine. But I'd rather allow do something like:
UpdateControl(lbFoo, () => { lbFoo.Items.Clear(); lbFoo.Items.Add("Bar");});
This does not work, returning error CS0834: A lambda expression with a statement body cannot be converted to an expression tree. The error is clear, I'm just not certain on how best to proceed. I could follow my original usage and do what I need in several lines, it's just not as tidy.
I'm guessing there is a better/easier way to do what I want.
If you don't use expressions, and just pass the action, like so:
public void UpdateControl(Control control, Action actionToExecute)
Then you can use this as written. The only other change will be your else statement, where you would just call this directly:
else
{
actionToExecute();
}

Cannot update Silverlight UI from asynchronous method completed callback

I have inherited some code that queries a DB over a WCF service and then employs a callback when it's done. I am trying to add some code to that callback to update the UI as the data is processed. I'm finding that I cannot get the UI to update during that callback:
client.GetDataAsync();
client.GetDataCompleted += new EventHandler<GetDataCompletedEventArgs>(GetDataCompleted);
void GetDataCompleted(object sender, GetDataCompletedEventArgs e)
{
// Loop through the data
// ...
textBlock1.Text= "test1";
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(() => textBlock1.Text= "test2" );
var thread = new Thread(() =>
{
// textBlock1.Text= "test3"; (this throws a cross-thread access exception)
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(() =>
{
textBlock1.Text= "test4";
});
}
thread.Start();
// ...
Debug.WriteLine("done");
}
None of these things update the UI until (apparently) the entire callback is completed. This post:
What thread calls the completed event handler on silverlight WCF calls?
suggests that the callback is running on the main UI thread so that the BeginInvoke call should be unnecessary. Even if I add various delays in the above code, it still doesn't work. Is this possible? Is there a better way to do this?
(This is a follow-up question to this: Multiple asynchronous UI updates in Silverlight)
degorolls is right in suggesting the TPL, your code would look like below (except without the comments)(Also, exceptions MUST be handled in the TPL, so that might make it not worth it, but I dont think it should).
The first methods would remain the same, and yes in event-based async programming thread-safety is taken care of (ie: you always return to the same thread you called out from)
I also noticed that the text output is all doing = instead of +=, but that is probably more of a problem of typing into overflow
So, test1 and test2 will print out at the same time, however everything being spit out from the TPL code should print as it comes in.
UI code should not be doing anything that requires too much time, though...only updating the UI. So, do think of this as a point to refactor?
Let me know if this helps or if I missed what you were looking for.
client.GetDataAsync();
client.GetDataCompleted += new EventHandler<GetDataCompletedEventArgs>(GetDataCompleted);
void GetDataCompleted(object sender, GetDataCompletedEventArgs e)
{
// Loop through the data
// ...
textBlock1.Text= "test1";
//////Dispatcher should not be needed here as this IS on the main UI thread
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(() => textBlock1.Text= "test2" );
//////Everything that happens here should NOT be on the main UI thread, thus the cross-thread access exception
//////You can do Dispatcher.CheckAccess to determine if you need to invoke or not
//////Notice the newCopyOfDataToBeWritten. This is a closure,
//////so using the same referenced object will result in errant data as it loops
//////Also, doing it this way does not guarantee any order that this will be written out
//////This will utilize the parallel fully, but there are ways to force the order
var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(()=>
{
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(()=>textBlock1.Text += newCopyOfDataToBeWritten)
}
);
// ...
///////I assume this is the end of the loop?
Debug.WriteLine("done");
}
....
the below dummied-down code based on what you posted seems to work for me
var outsideThread = new Thread(()=>
{
for(int i = 0; i < 20; i++)
{
//This code will show all at once since it is on the main thread,
//which is still running
//If you want this to display one at a time also, then you need
//to use threads and callbacks like below, also
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(()=>{textBlock1.Text += "outer" + i;});
int newI = i;
var thread = new Thread(() =>
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000 * newI);
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(() =>
{
//This will display as it comes in
textBlock1.Text += "inner" + newI;
});
});
thread.Start();
}
});
outsideThread.Start();

Help with understanding C# syntax while Invoking a new Action

I am new to c# and do not understand the syntax of invoking a new action or even what an action is. From my understanding in Port1_DataReceived, I have to create an action because I am in a new tread... Can anyone elaborate on why I need to do this?
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
SerialPort Port1 = new SerialPort("COM11", 57600, Parity.None, 8, StopBits.One);
Port1.DataReceived += new SerialDataReceivedEventHandler(Port1_DataReceived);
Port1.Open();
}
private void Port1_DataReceived(object sender, SerialDataReceivedEventArgs e)
{
SerialPort Port = (SerialPort)sender;
string Line = "";
int BytestoRead = Port.BytesToRead;
Line = Port.ReadLine();
label1.Invoke(new Action(() =>
{
label1.Text = Line;
}));
}
The code snip that I am really having trouble understanding is:
label1.Invoke(new Action(() =>
{
label1.Text = Line;
}));
Can someone break down what this is doing.. I am sure it is nothing to complicated, just that I have never seen anything like it before. The syntax that is really holding me up is ()=> the new action is pointing to the code below or something??
This uses something known as a "lambda expression" to create an anonymous delegate that matches the signature expected by the Action constructor.
You could achieve the same effect like this:
label1.Invoke(SetText);
...
public void SetText() { label1.Text = Line; }
or like this:
label1.Invoke(new Action(SetText));
...
public void SetText() { label1.Text = Line; }
or like this:
label1.Invoke(new Action(delegate() { label1.Text = Line; }));
or like this:
label1.Invoke(delegate() { label1.Text = Line; });
or like this:
label1.Invoke(() => label1.Text = Line);
These are mostly just syntactic shortcuts to make it easier to represent an action.
Note that lambda expressions often have parameters. When there is only one parameter, the parentheses are optional:
list.ToDictionary(i => i.Key);
When there are no parameters or multiple parameters, the parentheses are necessary to make it obvious what you're doing. Hence, the () =>.
Let's break it down piece by piece.
label1.Invoke(
This is the Control.Invoke method. Here's how it's defined:
public Object Invoke(Delegate method);
Executes the specified delegate on the thread that owns the control's underlying window handle.
What that means is that you give it a reference to a method to call, and Control.Invoke will make sure it gets called on the UI thread (which will prevent cross-threading exceptions while updating the UI.) It takes a default Delegate as a parameter, which means you need to pass it a method that takes no parameters and has no return value. That's where the System.Action delegate type comes in:
public delegate void Action();
Using lambda expressions, we can create an Action delegate inline. First, we specify the delegate type:
label1.Invoke(new Action(
Then, we will begin the lambda syntax. An empty set of parenthesis will denote that the lambda function takes no parameters, and an "arrow" afterwards shows that we want to start the method:
label1.Invoke(new Action(() =>
Now, because the lambda method has no return value (but must execute a statement) we need to surround the code we want to execute on the UI thread in curly braces:
label1.Invoke(new Action(() =>
{
label1.Text = Line;
}
Close up the remaining parenthesis, and you have the full, finished statement.
label1.Invoke(new Action(() =>
{
label1.Text = Line;
}));
Generally when you want to add something to you GUI and you are working from another thread you need to do something called Invocation.
To make an invocation you use either a Controls Invoke method or the something like an Application Dispatcher, these methods generally take an Action. An Action is just what it sounds like, something that is to be performed.
In your case what you are doing is that you want to add a line of text to an element that lives on your GUI, so what you need to do is to create an Action ( anonymouse method ) and in this action you just say "Add this to my Control". And then you Invoke this to avoid cross-threading problems.
()=> is just a "shortcut"(lambda way) to create a method, that is anonymous. This means that you can't call this from anywhere but the context of where you created the anonymous method.
You can also Invoke a "global" method, it doesn't have to be an anonymous method.
An Action is a delegate type, in other words it encapsulates a function. Specifically an Action encapsulates a function that returns void, whereas for instance a Func would encapsulate a function with a return value. These are alot like a function pointers in C++ -- essentially a reference to a function ie a way to encapsulate behavior.
The .Invoke() method takes the Action delegate and runs the function it points to. In this case the function it points to is the lambda expression:
() => { label1.Text = Line }
The initial parentheses denote any parameters being passed into the function. In this case there are no parameters so the parentheses are empty. For example if you wanted to pass in two strings, you would do:
var action = new Action<string, string>( (x, y) => { // use x and y }
Whatever follows the '=>' expression is essentially the body of the function. You have access to the variables specified in the parentheses inside the scope of this body.
Altogether this is a quick way to create an anonymous function on the fly that essentially is equivalent to the following:
public void SetLine()
{
label1.Text = Line;
}
As such you could also create that Action object by doing:
var action = new Action(SetLine)
where you are passing in the name of the method to encapsulate instead of passing in a lambda. Whats passed in is known as a 'Method Group'.
Action is a delegate. Label1.Invoke() is being used to execute the code label1.Text = line to avoid Cross Threading Operation. the event handler for DataReceived event is executing on a different thread other than UI thread. label1.Invoke() will execute the code in UI thread.
This is generating an anonymous method (a lambda, precisely) and passing that to the invoke method. Lambdas are a great way to have code you only need once so you don't need a lot of helper methods doing one thing only.
This is ensuring that the label's text is running in the UI thread. The Port1_DataReceived event will likely run in a background thread, and the Label's text value should not be set from background threads. This prevents that from happening.
I don't know what the label1 is, but the could could be read as:
label1 is an Action, that recieves another action as parameter. It does something and when it calls action recieved in argument.
Now, I've read that and I could be a problem - label1 could not be an Action. As it is just a control which set here: label1.Text = Line;
You have an error in your app;
EDIT
Sorry, just read that:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/zyzhdc6b.aspx
Executes the specified delegate on the thread that owns the control's underlying window handle.
Code is correct.

Categories