We Keep Coding

Is there a way to await a flag change in a function?

I've attempted to make a simple step mode for an algorithm I'm running, and here is how it looks like:
public async Task<bool> AStarAlgorithmAsync(PFSquare curr = null)
{
// some algorithm code here
foreach(var square in Sorroundings)
{
if (SteppedMode)
{
await Task.Run(Pause);
}
if (await AStarAlgorithmAsync(square))
{
return true;
}
}
}
In my application, I have a Boolean called SteppedMode that decides if the algorithm should run one iteration per click event.
Pause() looks like this:
private void Pause()
{
while (!ContinueStep) { }
ContinueStep = false;
return;
}
And in another part of my (GUI) application I have an event which sets the boolean ContinueStep to true which in theory should end the while loop and continue the algorithm function. Currently this bit of code locks my GUI thread up and I'm almost certain there is a better way to do this.
I'm trying to get my algorithm function to run one iteration, wait for a click from the user and only then continue running the algorithm. Is there an easier and cleaner way to do this?
(This is a GUI application, not a console application.)

Your property is moonlighting as a method.
It makes no sense to set a property, to then have that property revert back to its original state immediately. As a consumer, I would be majorly confused by that behavior. Think about this code:
var myObj = new MyObject();
myObj.MyBoolean = true;
Console.WriteLine(myObj.MyBoolean); // FALSE!?
It just doesn't make sense.
The only effect you want to trigger by setting this property is to execute some code. That's exactly what methods are supposed to be used for:
public void ContinueStep()
{
Console.WriteLine("I did some work");
}
So instead of this:
myObj.ContinueStep = true;
you should be doing this:
myObject.ContinueStep();
This doesn't lock up your UI thread, while also being a lot more sensical to your consumer. The method suggests that some action will be taken (which may or may not lead to state changes in the object - that's a contextual expectation).
Infinite recursion
As an aside; based on your code, AStarAlgorithmAsync is a recursive function, and seemingly infinitely so. There doesn't seem to be an ending condition.
Every recursive level will interate over the first surrounding and then trigger the next level, which again will interate over the first surrounding and then trigger the next level, which again ...
That can't be right, but it's unclear to me how to fix it as the bigger picture is not explained in your question
A simple implementation
What I'm trying to do is get my algorithm function to run one iteration, wait for a click from the user and only then continue running the algorithm, is there an easier and cleaner way to do this?
A simple example of such a thing:
private int _index = 0;
private List<object> _myList = ...; // assume this list contains some elements
public void ProcessNextObject()
{
if(_index < _myList.Length)
{
Process(_myList[_index]);
_index++;
}
}
private void Process(object o)
{
Console.WriteLine("Processing this object!");
}
You can then hook up your click event to call ProcessNextObject().
Note that in this example, the list is processed once and cannot be processed again. By manipulating the index value, you can change that behavior as you like.

MessageBox and while loop C#

I'm modifying existing C# code in order to pilote a piston. Every 30ms, I have a direct feedback of the position of this piston, through an event. The value is stored in a global variable I use to get the current position of the piston.
What I'm trying to achieve: for a given distance input (A->C), I want the piston to travel at full speed for 95% of the distance (A->B), and then slower for the remaining 5% (B->C).
I have access to a command that defines the speed and the destination of the piston : pos(velocity, destination).
However, if I write that code:
pos(fullSpeed,B);
pos(reducedSpeed, C);
the piston directly goes from fullSpeed to reducedSpeed
I tried to use a while loop to compare the current position of the piston with the goal destination, however, upon entering the while loop, the variable storing the piston position does not update anymore.
However, I noticed that by throwing a MessageBox in between, the position value keeps on getting updated, and I can simply click "ok" to launch the second command.
pos(fullSpeed,B);
MessageBox.show("Wait");
pos(reducedSpeed, C);
I would like to know why the "while" loop stops the update of the position variable but the MessageBox does not. I mean, as long as I don't click the "ok" button, the box is here preventing me from doing anything, which for me ressembles a while loop behaviour. Is there another way for me to do this instead of the MessageBox ?
I have little to no knowledge when it comes to C# and no support. I have tried to look in the documentation, but I did not find an answer (I have probably missed it). Any lead is more than welcome.
EDIT: I have no documentation for that code, and it is barely commented. Here is what I gathered (really hope it helps):
To move the piston, taht function is called:
MyEdc.Move.Pos(control, speed, destination, ref MyTan);
control simply define what we pilote (a distance or a load, it is an enum), and I have no idea what MyTan does. Only thing I know is that the MyEdc.Move.Pos returns an error code.
If I look at the definition of "pos", I am redirected to class
public DoPEmove Move;
containing among other things:
public DoPE.ERR Pos(DoPE.CTRL MoveCtrl, double Speed, double Destination, ref short Tan);
DoPE.ERR is also an type enum. However, I cannot reach the definition of a function named "Pos". Coud it be within the .dll included ?
The following is the code that allows me to access the position of the piston (without the global variables):
private int OnData(ref DoPE.OnData Data, object Parameter)
{
if (Data.DoPError == DoPE.ERR.NOERROR)
{
DoPE.Data Sample = Data.Data;
Int32 Time = Environment.TickCount;
if ((Time - LastTime) >= 300 /*ms*/)
{
LastTime = Time;
string text;
text = String.Format("{0}", Sample.Time.ToString("0.000"));
guiTime.Text = text;
text = String.Format("{0}", Sample.Sensor[(int)DoPE.SENSOR.SENSOR_S].ToString("0.000"));
guiPosition.Text = text;
text = String.Format("{0}", Sample.Sensor[(int)DoPE.SENSOR.SENSOR_F].ToString("0.000"));
guiLoad.Text = text;
text = String.Format("{0}", Sample.Sensor[(int)DoPE.SENSOR.SENSOR_E].ToString("0.000"));
guiExtension.Text = text;
}
}
return 0;
}
Which is called using
MyEdc.Eh.OnDataHdlr += new DoPE.OnDataHdlr(OnData);
I realise how little I know on how the soft operates, and how frustrating this is for you. If you think this is a lost cause, no problem, I'll try Timothy Jannace solution, and if it does not help me, I'll stick with the MessageBox solution. I just wanted to know why the MessageBox allowed me to sort of achieve my objectif, but the while loop did not, and how to use it in my advantage here.

I tried to use a while loop to compare the current position of the
piston with the goal destination, however, upon entering the while
loop, the variable storing the piston position does not update
anymore.
While you are in the while loop, your app can no longer receive and process the feedback event.
One possible solution would be to use async/await like this:
private const int fullSpeed = 1;
private const int reducedSpeed = 2;
private int currentPistonPositon = 0; // global var updated by event as you described
private async void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
int B = 50;
int C = 75;
pos(fullSpeed, B);
await Task.Run(() =>
{ // pick one below?
// assumes that "B" and "currentPistonPosition" can actually be EXACTLY the same value
while (currentPistonPositon != B)
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(25);
}
// if this isn't the case, then perhaps when it reaches a certain threshold distance?
while (Math.Abs(currentPistonPositon - B) > 0.10)
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(25);
}
});
pos(reducedSpeed, C);
}
Note the button1_Click method signature has been marked with async. The code will wait for the while loop inside the task to complete while still processing event messages because of the await. Only then will it move on to the second pos() call.
Thank you for your answer ! It works like a charm ! (good catch on the
EXACT value). I learnt a lot, and I am sure the async/await combo is
going to be very usefull in the future ! – MaximeS
If that worked well, then you might want to consider refactoring the code and making your own "goto position" method like this:
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
int B = 50;
int C = 75;
GotoPosition(fullSpeed, B);
GotoPosition(reducedSpeed, C);
}
private async void GotoPosition(int speed, int position)
{
pos(speed, position);
await Task.Run(() =>
{
while (Math.Abs(currentPistonPositon - position) > 0.10)
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(25);
}
});
}
Readability would be greatly improved.
You could even get fancier and introduce a timeout concept into the while loop. Now your code could do something like below:
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
int B = 50;
int C = 75;
if (GotoPosition(fullSpeed, B, TimeSpan.FromMilliseconds(750)).Result)
{
if (GotoPosition(reducedSpeed, C, TimeSpan.FromMilliseconds(1500)).Result)
{
// ... we successfully went to B at fullSpeed, then to C at reducedSpeed ...
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("Piston Timed Out");
}
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("Piston Timed Out");
}
}
private async Task<bool> GotoPosition(int speed, int position, TimeSpan timeOut)
{
pos(speed, position); // call the async API
// wait for the position to be reached, or the timeout to occur
bool success = true; // assume we have succeeded until proven otherwise
DateTime dt = DateTime.Now.Add(timeOut); // set our timeout DateTime in the future
await Task.Run(() =>
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(50); // give the piston a chance to update maybe once before checking?
while (Math.Abs(currentPistonPositon - position) > 0.10) // see if the piston has reached our target position
{
if (DateTime.Now > dt) // did we move past our timeout DateTime?
{
success = false;
break;
}
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(25); // very small sleep to reduce CPU usage
}
});
return success;
}

If you're using events you are probably having concurrency issues. Especially with events being raised every 30ms!
A very simple way to handle concurrency is to use a lock object to prevent different threads from using contested resources simultaneously:
class MyEventHandler
{
private object _lockObject;
MyEventHandler()
{
_lockObject = new object();
}
public int MyContestedResource { get; }
public void HandleEvent( object sender, MyEvent event )
{
lock ( _lockObject )
{
// do stuff with event here
MyContestedResource++;
}
}
}
Keep in mind that is very simple and by no means perfect in every scenario. If you provide more information about how the events are raised and what you're doing with them people will be able to provide more help.
EDIT:
Using that signature you posted for the Pos method I was able to find documentation on the library you are using: https://www.academia.edu/24938060/Do_PE
The reason you only see the method signature when you goto definition is because the library has been compiled into a dll. Actually, it probably wouldn't be that useful to see the code anyway because it looks like the library is a C# wrapper around native (c or c++) code.
Anyways, I hope the documentation is helpful to you. If you look at page 20 there are some pointers on doing movement. This is going to be a challenge for a new programmer but you can do it. I would suggest you avoid using the event handler to drive your logic and instead stick with using the synchronous versions of commands. Using the synchronous commands your code should operate the same way it reads.

I believe what you'll want to do is add a call to:
Application.DoEvents();
This will allow your application to process posted messages (events), which will allow that global variable to be updated.
I just wanted to know why the MessageBox allowed me to sort of achieve my objectif, but the while loop did not, and how to use it in my advantage here.
The reason that works is because you're giving the WndProc a chance to process events which have been sent to the application. It's not an intended feature of that call to MessageBox.Show();, but it is a consequence. You can do the same thing with a call to Application.DoEvents(); without the interruption of the message box.

Cancelling Coroutine when Home button presseddown or returned main menu

some pretext of what I am doing ; I am currently locking down my skill buttons via setting interactable = false in coroutines. Showing text of remaning seconds via textmeshpro and setting them deactive when countdown is over. But I am having problem when home button is pressed/ returned main menu. I would like to refresh my buttons cooldowns and stop coroutines when its pressed. But it is staying in lock position.
this is my cooldown coroutine
static List<CancellationToken> cancelTokens = new List<CancellationToken>();
...
public IEnumerator StartCountdown(float countdownValue, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
try
{
this.currentCooldownDuration = countdownValue;
// Deactivate myButton
this.myButton.interactable = false;
//activate text to show remaining cooldown seconds
this.m_Text.SetActive(true);
while (this.currentCooldownDuration > 0 && !cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested)
{
this.m_Text.GetComponent<TMPro.TextMeshProUGUI>().text = this.currentCooldownDuration.ToString(); //Showing the Score on the Canvas
yield return new WaitForSeconds(1.0f);
this.currentCooldownDuration--;
}
}
finally
{
// deactivate text and Reactivate myButton
// deactivate text
this.m_Text.SetActive(false);
// Reactivate myButton
this.myButton.interactable = true;
}
}
static public void cancelAllCoroutines()
{
Debug.Log("cancelling all coroutines with total of : " + cancelTokens.Count);
foreach (CancellationToken ca in cancelTokens)
{
ca.IsCancellationRequested = true;
}
}
void OnButtonClick()
{
CancellationToken cancelToken = new CancellationToken();
cancelTokens.Add(cancelToken);
Coroutine co;
co = StartCoroutine(StartCountdown(cooldownDuration, cancelToken));
myCoroutines.Add(co);
}
this is where I catch when home button pressed/returned main menu. when catch it and pop pauseMenu
public void PauseGame()
{
GameObject menu = Instantiate(PauseMenu);
menu.transform.SetParent(Canvas.transform, false);
gameManager.PauseGame();
EventManager.StartListening("ReturnMainMenu", (e) =>
{
Cooldown.cancelAllCoroutines();
Destroy(menu);
BackToMainMenu();
EventManager.StopListening("ReturnMainMenu");
});
...
I also stop time when game on the pause
public void PauseGame() {
Time.timeScale = 0.0001f;
}

You are using CancellationToken incorrectly in this case. CancellationToken is a struct that wraps a CancellationTokenSource like this:
public bool IsCancellationRequested
{
get
{
return source != null && source.IsCancellationRequested;
}
}
Because it's a struct, it gets passed around by value, meaning the one you store in your list is not the same instance as the one that your Coroutine has.
The typical way to handle cancellation is to create a CancellationTokenSource and pass its Token around. Whenever you want to cancel it, you simply call the .Cancel() method on the CancellationTokenSource. The reason for it being this way is so that the CancellationToken can only be cancelled through the 'source' reference and not by consumers of the token.
In your case, you are creating a token with no source at all so I would suggest making the following changes:
First of all, change your cancelTokens list to be a:
List<CancellationTokenSource>
Next, change your OnButtonClick() method to look like this:
public void OnButtonClick()
{
// You should probably call `cancelAllCoroutines()` here
cancelAllCoroutines();
var cancellationTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
cancelTokens.Add(cancellationTokenSource);
Coroutine co = StartCoroutine(StartCountdown(cooldownDuration, cancellationTokenSource.Token));
myCoroutines.Add(co);
}
And lastly, change your cancelAllCoroutines() method to this:
public static void CancelAllCoroutines()
{
Debug.Log("cancelling all coroutines with total of : " + cancelTokens.Count);
foreach (CancellationTokenSource ca in cancelTokens)
{
ca.Cancel();
}
// Clear the list as #Jack Mariani mentioned
cancelTokens.Clear();
}
I would suggest reading the docs on Cancellation Tokens or alternatively, as #JLum suggested, use the StopCoroutine method that Unity provides.
EDIT:
I forgot to mention that it is recommended that CancallationTokenSources be disposed of when no longer in use so as to ensure no memory leaks occur. I would recommend doing this in an OnDestroy() hook for your MonoBehaviour like so:
private void OnDestroy()
{
foreach(var source in cancelTokens)
{
source.Dispose();
}
}
EDIT 2:
As #Jack Mariani mentioned in his answer, multiple CancellationTokenSources is overkill in this case. All it would really allow you to do is have more fine-grained control over which Coroutine gets cancelled. In this case, you are cancelling them all in one go, so yeah, an optimisation would be to only create one of them. There are multiple optimisations that could be made here, but they are beyond the scope of this question. I did not include them because I felt like it would bloat this answer out more than necessary.
However, I would argue his point about CancellationToken being 'mostly intended for Task'. Pulled straight from the first couple of lines in the MSDN docs:
Starting with the .NET Framework 4, the .NET Framework uses a unified model for cooperative cancellation of asynchronous or long-running synchronous operations. This model is based on a lightweight object called a cancellation token
CancellationTokens are lightweight objects. For the most part, they are just simple Structs that reference a CancellationTokenSource. The 'overhead' that is mentioned in his answer is negligible and, in my eyes, totally worth it when considering readability and intention.
You could pass a load of booleans around with indices or subscribe to events using string literals and those approaches would work.
But at what cost? Confusing and difficult-to-read code? I would say not worth it.
The choice is ultimately yours though.

MAIN ISSUE
In your question you just use the bool cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested and no other functionalities of Cancellation Token.
So, following the logic of your method, you might just want to have a List<bool> cancellationRequests and pass them using ref keyword.
Still, I would not go ahead with that logic nor with the logic proposed by Darren Ruane, because they have one main flaw.
FLAW => these solutions keep adding things to 2 lists cancelTokens.Add(...) and myCoroutines.Add(co), without ever clearing them.
public void OnButtonClick()
{
...other code
//this never get cleared
cancelTokens.Add(cancelToken);
...other code
//this never get cleared
myCoroutines.Add(co);
}
If you want to go down this way you could remove them manually, but it's tricky, because you never know when they will be required (the Coroutine can be called many frames after CancelAllCoroutines method).
SOLUTION
Use a static event instead of a list
To remove the list and make the class even more decoupled you might use a static event, created and invoked in the script where you call the PauseGame method.
//the event somewhere in the script
public static event Action OnCancelCooldowns;
public void PauseGame()
{
...your code here, with no changes...
EventManager.StartListening("ReturnMainMenu", (e) =>
{
//---> Removed ->Cooldown.cancelAllCoroutines();
//replaced by the event
OnCancelCooldowns?.Invoke();
...your code here, with no changes...
});
...
You will listen to the static event in your coroutine.
public IEnumerator StartCountdown(float countdownValue, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
try
{
bool wantToStop = false;
//change YourGameManager with the name of the script with your PauseGame method.
YourGameManager.OnCancelCooldowns += () => wantToStop = true;
...your code here, with no changes...
while (this.currentCooldownDuration > 0 && !wantToStop)
{
...your code here, with no changes...
}
}
finally
{
...your code here, with no changes...
}
}
EASIER SOLUTION
Or you might just stay simple and use MEC Coroutines instead of Unity ones (they are also more performant ).
MEC Free offers the tag functionality that solves the problem entirely.
SINGLE COROUTINE START
void OnButtonClick() => Timing.RunCoroutine(CooldownCoroutine, "CooldownTag");
STOP ALL COROUTINE with a specific tag
public void PauseGame()
{
...your code here, with no changes...
EventManager.StartListening("ReturnMainMenu", (e) =>
{
//---> Removed ->Cooldown.cancelAllCoroutines();
//replaced by this
Timing.KillCoroutines("CooldownTag");
...your code here, with no changes...
});
...
Further notes on tags (please consider that MEC free has only tags and not layers, but you require just tags in your use case).
EDIT:
After some thought I just decided to remove the details of the bool solution, it might confuse the answer and it was going beyond the scope of this question.

Unity has StopCoroutine() specifically for ending Coroutines early.
You will want to create a function that you can call on every skill button object when you want to reset them all like this:
void resetButton()
{
StopCoroutine(StartCountdown);
this.currentCooldownDuration = 0;
this.m_Text.SetActive(false);
this.myButton.interactable = true;
}

Measure the time a person has gazed at multiple objects

I'm trying to create an UWP app that measure's the time a person has gazed at multiple objects. There are around 300 objects and they all need to measure the time and display that in a text file. I've succesfully coded this for just one object, but I do not know how I am able to do this with multiple ones. I saw this post How to create 300 stopwatches in C# more efficiently? and the answer to that helped me quite a lot, but the code does not implement well with my code. So I like the idea of creating a list of objects and then when the person has gazed in object [o] then the corresponding stopwatch will start when the eyes have entered the object, and stop when the eyes have left the object. Problem is as I mentioned already, the solution does not work well with the code I am working with. This is the code that I used that works for just one element.
public sealed partial class BlankPage1 : Page
{
private GazeElement gazeButtonControl;
private GazePointer gazePointer;
public BlankPage1()
{
this.InitializeComponent();
Stopwatch Timer = new Stopwatch();
gazePointer = GazeInput.GetGazePointer(null);
gazeButtonControl = GazeInput.GetGazeElement(GazeBlock);
gazeButtonControl = new GazeElement();
GazeInput.SetGazeElement(GazeBlock, gazeButtonControl);
gazeButtonControl.StateChanged += GazeButtonControl_StateChanged;
void GazeButtonControl_StateChanged(object sender, StateChangedEventArgs ea)
{
if (ea.PointerState == PointerState.Enter)
{
Timer.Start();
}
if (ea.PointerState == PointerState.Exit)
{
Timer.Stop();
CreateStatistics();
}
}
void CreateStatistics()
{
File.WriteAllText(#"C:\Users\Vincent Korpelshoek\AppData\Local\Packages\app.a264e06e2-5084-4424-80a9-bee5f5fbb6b6_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalState\Resultaten.txt", Timer.Elapsed.ToString(););
}
}
}
The "GazeBlock" is the name of the first object that has been created in the XAML file. So long story short, I'd like to implement this solution:
static Dictionary<object, Stopwatch> stopwatchesByObject;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
List<object> objects = new List<object>();
// now you have to fill the objects list...
stopwatchesByObject = new Dictionary<object, Stopwatch>();
foreach (var o in objects)
{
stopwatchesByObject.Add(o, new Stopwatch());
}
}
// Call this method when the user starts gazing at object o
static void StartGazingAt(object o)
{
stopwatchesByObject[o].Start();
}
// Call this method when the user stops gazing at object o
static void StopGazingAt(object o)
{
stopwatchesByObject[o].Stop();
}
static void CreateStatistics()
{
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
foreach (var entry in stopwatchesByObject)
{
sb.AppendLine($"Gazed at {entry.Key.ToString()} for {entry.Value.Elapsed.TotalSeconds} seconds.");
}
File.WriteAllText("c:\\temp\\statictics.txt", sb.ToString());
}
But I do not know how to 'merge' these two together so the solution not only works for just one object, but for around 300 of them. If anyone knows how to help me to make this work, thank you!
Vincent

It seems that for each object you create, you need to add it to the dictionary (along with a new Stopwatch), then add the GazeButtonControl_StateChanged event handler to it (you could add this same event handler to all of the controls), then in that event handler you would reference the correct stopwatch by using the sender argument: stopwatchesByObject[sender].Start();
This may not be exactly correct, but here's what I think you'd need to do to merge the two pieces of code:
public sealed partial class BlankPage1 : Page
{
private GazeElement gazeButtonControl;
private GazePointer gazePointer;
static Dictionary<object, Stopwatch> stopwatchesByObject;
public BlankPage1()
{
this.InitializeComponent();
gazePointer = GazeInput.GetGazePointer(null);
gazeButtonControl = GazeInput.GetGazeElement(GazeBlock);
gazeButtonControl = new GazeElement();
GazeInput.SetGazeElement(GazeBlock, gazeButtonControl);
gazeButtonControl.StateChanged += GazeButtonControl_StateChanged;
// Add the object to our dictionary along with a new stopwatch
stopwatchesByObject.Add(gazeButtonControl, new Stopwatch());
private void GazeButtonControl_StateChanged(object sender, StateChangedEventArgs ea)
{
// Use the sender argument to choose the correct timer
if (ea.PointerState == PointerState.Enter)
{
if (stopwatchesByObject.ContainsKey(sender))
{
stopwatchesByObject[sender].Start();
}
}
else if (ea.PointerState == PointerState.Exit)
{
if (stopwatchesByObject.ContainsKey(sender))
{
stopwatchesByObject[sender].Stop();
CreateStatistics();
}
}
}
private void CreateStatistics()
{
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
foreach (var entry in stopwatchesByObject)
{
sb.AppendLine($"Gazed at {entry.Key} for {entry.Value.Elapsed.TotalSeconds} seconds.");
}
File.WriteAllText("c:\\temp\\statictics.txt", sb.ToString());
}
}
}

#Vincent perhaps it would be worth looking at this in a different way.
With eye tracking the user can only look at one location on the screen at any point in time, so unless your objects are layered overtop of each other in 2D space or potentially aligned in the line of sight in 3D space, you may only be interested in timing the length of time the users gaze point stays in the current topmost object. One stopwatche might be sufficient to keep track of the time from OnEnter to OnExit for the active object.
If on the OnExit you add the duration of time for that particular gaze interaction to lastGazedObject's cumulative time count, you probably do not need to (or want to) manage 300 stopwatches and can likely just reuse the same stopwatch each time the user's gaze enters an object then leaves the object. As it leaves one object the very next gaze point will either fall on another object or on empty space with no object.
Have you taken a look at this sample ?
It has many of the pieces for determining how long the gaze remains in a single object, with some additional logic to track the lastGazedObject you might be able to accomplish what you are after without managing a whole bunch of stopwatches or timers.
However, even if the scenario that you are trying to solve for does approach the problem like a ray cast that could be intersecting more than one object at a time (due to overlay or alignment in space) it should still be easy to have one long running stop watch and just keep track of a flag property for each object of UserIsGazingAt along with when the GazeAtStarted, then calculate the duration as soon as the gaze moves away from the object and add the duration to the objects total duration.
HTH

Run event once during Update() XNA / C#

this is the best way I can think of doing this. Could you give me so hints as to whether this is the correct way or if there is a more efficient way of doing it.
My situation is:
Each time the frame is Update()'ed (Like in XNA) I want to check if something has happened.. Like if the timer for that screen has been running for over 2000 milliseconds. But I only want it to fire once, not every time the frame is updated. This would cause a problem:
if(totalMilliseconds > 2000)
{
this.Fader.FadeIn();
}
So I came up with this method that I have implemented in the GameScreen class that looks like this:
public bool RunOnce(string Alias, bool IsTrue)
{
if (!this.Bools.ContainsKey(Alias))
this.Bools.Add(Alias, false);
if (IsTrue && !this.Bools[Alias])
{
this.Bools[Alias] = true;
return true;
}
else
return false;
}
This basically checks if the passed if statement boolean is true, if it is then it fires once and not again unless the Bool["Alias"] is set back to false. I use it like this:
if(this.RunOnce("fadeInStarted", totalMilliseconds > 2000))
{
this.Fader.FadeIn();
}
This will then only run one time and I think is quite easily readable code-wise.
The reason I have posted this is for two reasons.. Firstly because I wanted to show how I have overcome the problem as it may be of some help to others who had the same problem.. And secondly to see if I have missed an obvious way of doing this without creating a manual method for it, or if it could be done more efficiently.

Your method is interesting, I don't see a problem with it, you've essentially created a new programming construct.
I haven't encountered this situation a lot so what I have done in this situation is always start with the untidy approach:
bool _hasFadedIn = false;
.
if(totalMilliseconds > 2000 && !_hasFadedIn)
{
this.Fader.FadeIn();
_hasFadedIn = true;
}
And 90% of the time I leave it like that. I only change things if the class starts growing too big. What I would do then is this:
_faderControl.Update(totalMilliseconds);
Put the logic for fader control into a separate class, so:
class FaderControl
{
bool _hasFadedIn=false;
public void Update(int totalMilliseconds)
{
if (_hasFadedIn)
return;
if (totalMilliseconds <= 2000)
return;
this.Fader.FadeIn();
_hasFadedIn=true;
}
}
It can be modified to make it configurable, like reseting, setting "start", "end", fadein time, or also controlling fadeout too.

Here's how I would approach this problem.
These are your requirements:
You have arbitrary pieces of logic which you want to execute inside of your Update().
The logic in question has a predicate associated with it which determines whether the action is ready to execute.
The action should execute at most once.
The core concept here is "action with an associated predicate," so create a data structure which represents that concept:
public class ConditionalAction
{
public ConditionalAction(Action action, Func<Boolean> predicate)
{
this.Action = action;
this.Predicate = predicate;
}
public Action Action { get; private set; }
public Func<Boolean> Predicate { get; private set; }
}
So now, your example becomes
var action = new ConditionalAction(
() => this.Fader.FadeIn(),
() => totalMilliseconds > 2000);
In your Update() you need something that can execute these conditional actions:
public void Update(GameTime time)
{
// for each conditional action that hasn't run yet:
// check the action's predicate
// if true:
// execute action
// remove action from list of pending actions
}
Because their predicates are probably unrelated, actions don't necessarily run in order. So this isn't a simple queue of actions. It's a list of actions from which actions can be removed in arbitrary order.
I'm going to implement this as a linked list in order to demonstrate the concept, but that's probably not the best way to implement this in production code. Linked lists allocate memory on the managed heap, which is generally something to be avoided in XNA. However, coming up with a better data structure for this purpose is an exercise best left for another day.
private readonly LinkedList<ConditionalAction> pendingConditionalActions =
new LinkedList<ConditionalAction>();
public void Update(GameTime time)
{
for (var current = pendingConditionalActions.First; current != null; current = current.Next)
{
if (current.Value.Predicate())
{
current.Value.Action();
pendingConditionalActions.Remove(current);
}
}
}
public void RegisterConditionalAction(ConditionalAction action)
{
pendingConditionalActions.AddLast(action);
}
Registered actions will wait until their predicates become true, at which point they will be executed and removed from the list of pending actions, ensuring that they only run once.