I am trying to run a series of tasks in the background of my Telnet / SSH program. sadly it seems I am not able to find out how to get this to work on the background.
I have tried using Tasks :
Task ReindexStock = new Task(delegate
{
this.Invoke(new Action(() =>
{
btnReindexStock.PerformClick();
txtBoxInput.Text = command[1];
ExecuteCommand();
}
));
});
ReindexStock.Start();
ReindexStock.Wait();
Task Product_attribute = new Task(delegate
{
this.Invoke(new Action(() =>
{
btnReindexProduct_Attribute.PerformClick();
txtBoxInput.Text = command[2];
ExecuteCommand();
}
));
});
Product_attribute.Start();
Product_attribute.Wait();
I also tried threads :
new Thread(() =>
{
btnReindexStock.PerformClick();
txtBoxInput.Text = command[1];
ExecuteCommand();
}).Start();
new Thread(() =>
{
btnReindexProduct_Attribute.PerformClick();
txtBoxInput.Text = command[2];
ExecuteCommand();
}).Start();
as well as this ( plucked this one from the net, hoped it would work ):
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(delegate
{
btnReindexStock.PerformClick();
txtBoxInput.Text = command[1];
ExecuteCommand();
});
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(delegate
{
btnReindexProduct_Attribute.PerformClick();
txtBoxInput.Text = command[2];
ExecuteCommand();
});
But for some reason my program still freezes when it's doing ExecuteCommand (
var cmd = SSH.client.CreateCommand(txtBoxInput.Text);
var result = cmd.Execute();
this.Invoke(new Action(() =>
{
rTxtBoxOutput.Text += result;
var reader = new StreamReader(cmd.ExtendedOutputStream);
rTxtBoxOutput.Text += "\n" + reader.ReadToEnd();
}
));
)
I have tried several things in the backgroundworker_doWork aswell but none of them seemed to work.. I tried to start a new thread like this
new Thread(new ThreadStart(ReindexAll)).Start();
also like this but I guess this is practically the same but larger
Thread t = new Thread(new ThreadStart(ReindexAll));
t.Start();
t.IsBackground = true;
and
Task.Factory.StartNew(() => ReindexAll());
as well as the plain and simple
ReindexAll();
but as I said before none of it seems to work, the moment I execute my command the program freezes.
Now my question is if someone is able to tell me what I am doing wrong and hopefully help me
From most of your examples, it looks like you're trying to click a button on your background thread to start performing whatever task this is.
all UI is only able to work on the UI thread. Most of this would almost definitely cause an error, I would think. If you're trying to do something strictly off of the UI thread, you can. However, you shouldn't be triggering a button on another thread to do so. Typically speaking, the button should be triggered by your operator only.
If you need to do some work without the operator's involvement, you can either do it in the start of the app when everything is loading up, or you can set a timer and trigger the work via that. Again, this shouldn't trigger a button, but the work itself.
Okay, first up - I'd suggest simplifying the stuff where you're creating Tasks. Instead of trying to write an inline delegate, just break out the Task's code into a separate function, and then have the Task refer to it. Much simpler, much cleaner.
Task myTask = new Task(TaskCode);
// elsewhere ...
private void TaskCode()
{
// stuff
}
At that point, after creating myTask, you can simply call myTask.Start() and you're done.
Now, that's only one half of your problem. If you tried this:
private void TaskCode()
{
SomeGuiControl.Text = "something";
}
... you're going to get an error that you can't update a GUI control from the non-gui thread. However, you can use Invoke or BeginInvoke to kick over a message to the GUI thread to handle an update (see: Writing to a TextBox from another thread?) The simplest being something like:
txtResults.BeginInvoke(new Action(() => txtResults.Text = DateTime.Now.ToString() + " Hello World"));
Finally, there's one additional caveat that's very important. You shouldn't do a Task.Wait() on the GUI thread. Why? Because all the GUI events won't fire off until the Task.Wait() finishes - which means, if you're doing updating of the GUI card throughout the task, it won't show up until everything is done! Keep in mind, the idea is to keep the GUI thread's code as quickly-done as possible. Kick off the thread and exit out - keep the GUI thread free to process other events (user or otherwise.)
Putting it all together? Here's what my sample code looks like on a WinForm I created for this problem:
private void btnSmallJob_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Task myTask = new Task(SmallTaskCode);
myTask.Start(); // NOTE: I'm NOT doing a wait() on this task; don't want to hold up the GUI thread.
}
private void SmallTaskCode()
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000);
txtResults.BeginInvoke(new Action(() => txtResults.Text += DateTime.Now.ToString() + " Small Job" + Environment.NewLine));
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
Task singleInstanceOfLargeJob;
private void btnLargeJob_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (this.singleInstanceOfLargeJob == null || this.singleInstanceOfLargeJob.Status != TaskStatus.Running)
{
singleInstanceOfLargeJob = new Task(LargeTaskCode);
singleInstanceOfLargeJob.Start(); // NOTE: I'm NOT doing a wait() on this task; don't want to hold up the GUI thread.
return;
}
MessageBox.Show("Sorry, you can only have one instance of the large job running at once!");
// this job should only have one instance running at a time!
}
private void LargeTaskCode()
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000);
txtResults.BeginInvoke(new Action(() => txtResults.Text += DateTime.Now.ToString() + " Big Job A" + Environment.NewLine));
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000);
txtResults.BeginInvoke(new Action(() => txtResults.Text += DateTime.Now.ToString() + " Big Job B" + Environment.NewLine));
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000);
txtResults.BeginInvoke(new Action(() => txtResults.Text += DateTime.Now.ToString() + " Big Job C" + Environment.NewLine));
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
Basically, I've got it two different ways. The first half is just a simple, kick-off-the-thread-and-done. The second keeps track of the Task, and doesn't allow two of the job to be running at the same time.
Anyway, hope that helps!
Related
What I am trying to achieve is to add text after every operation to a RichTextBox.
The problem is, that these operations take some time and instead of viewing the appended text after every operation finishes, I view them all at the end of the routine.
Semi-Pseudo code:
RichTextBox richTextBox = new RichTextBox()
if (Operation1())
{
richTextBox.AppendText("Operation1 finished");
if (Operation2())
{
richTextBox.AppendText("Operation2 finished");
if (Operation3())
{
richTextBox.AppendText("Operation3 finished");
}
}
}
The problem is that I view the appended text of operation 1 & 2 after the operation 3 is finished.
I read somewhere that I need to use something called BackgroundWorker???
Using BackgroundWorker, you would just put the background work into DoWork, and the update into RunWorkerCompleted:
var bw1 = new BackgroundWorker();
var bw2 = new BackgroundWorker();
var bw3 = new BackgroundWorker();
bw1.DoWork += (sender, args) => args.Result = Operation1();
bw2.DoWork += (sender, args) => args.Result = Operation2();
bw3.DoWork += (sender, args) => args.Result = Operation2();
bw1.RunWorkerCompleted += (sender, args) => {
if ((bool)args.Result)
{
richTextBox.AppendText("Operation1 ended\n");
bw2.RunWorkerAsync();
}
};
bw2.RunWorkerCompleted += (sender, args) => {
if ((bool)args.Result)
{
richTextBox.AppendText("Operation2 ended\n");
bw3.RunWorkerAsync();
}
};
bw3.RunWorkerCompleted += (sender, args) => {
if ((bool)args.Result)
{
richTextBox.AppendText("Operation3 ended\n");
}
};
bw1.RunWorkerAsync();
You'll notice that this runs afoul of "DRY". You could always consider abstracting the tasks for each step using something like:
var operations = new Func<bool>[] { Operation1, Operation2, Operation3, };
var workers = new BackgroundWorker[operations.Length];
for (int i = 0; i < operations.Length; i++)
{
int locali = i; // avoid modified closure
var bw = new BackgroundWorker();
bw.DoWork += (sender, args) => args.Result = operations[locali]();
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += (sender, args) =>
{
txt.Text = string.Format("Operation{0} ended\n", locali+1);
if (locali < operations.Length - 1)
workers[locali + 1].RunWorkerAsync();
};
workers[locali] = bw;
}
workers[0].RunWorkerAsync();
You could do the above 3 times, or use ReportProgress to run all tasks in one background thread, and periodically report progress.
The way that WPF (and most other UI frameworks work) is that there is a UI thread, which handles all the UI events (such as button clicking) and UI drawing.
The UI can't draw things if it's busy doing other things. What's happening is this:
You click a button
The UI thread gets a button click message, and invokes your click handler function
Now, the UI can't redraw or perform any other updates until your click handler function finishes.
Your Operation1 function finishes, and you append to the RichTextBox
The UI can't update because it's still stuck running your code
Your Operation2 function finishes, and you append to the RichTextBox
The UI can't update because it's still stuck running your code
Your Operation3 function finishes, and you append to the RichTextBox
Your function finishes, and now the UI thread is free, and it can finally process the updates and redraw itself.
This is why you see a pause and then all 3 updates together.
What you need to do is make the code that takes a long time run on a different thread so that the UI thread can remain free to redraw and update when you'd like it to. This sample program works for me - it requires .NET 4.5 to compile and run
using System.Threading.Tasks;
...
// note we need to declare the method async as well
public async void Button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs args)
{
if (await Task.Run(new Func<bool>(Operation1)))
{
richTextBox.AppendText("Operation1 finished");
if (await Task.Run(new Func<bool>(Operation2)))
{
richTextBox.AppendText("Operation2 finished");
if (await Task.Run(new Func<bool>(Operation3)))
{
richTextBox.AppendText("Operation3 finished");
}
}
}
}
What happens here is that we use the C# magical async feature, and the order of operations goes like this:
You click a button
The UI thread gets a button click message, and invokes your click handler function
Instead of calling Operation1 directly, we pass it to Task.Run. This helper function will run your Operation1 method on a thread pool thread.
We use the magic await keyword to wait for the thread pool to finish executing operation1. What this does behind the scenes is something morally equivalent to this:
suspend the current function - and thus free up the UI thread to re-draw itself
resume when the thing we're waiting for completes
Because we're running the long operations in the thread pool now, the UI thread can draw it's updates when it wants to, and you'll see the messages get added as you'd expect.
There are some potential drawbacks to this though:
Because your Operation1 method is Not running on the UI thread, if it needs to access any UI related data (for example, if it wants to read some text from a textbox, etc), it can no longer do this. You have to do all the UI stuff first, and pass it as a parameter to the Operation1 method
It's generally not a good idea to put things that take a long time (more than say 100ms) into the thread pool, as the thread pool can be used for other things (like network operations, etc) and often needs to have some free capacity for this. If your app is just a simple GUI app though, this is unlikely to affect you.
If it is a problem for you, you can use the await Task.Factory.StartNew<bool>(_ => Operation1(), null, TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning))) instead and each task will run in it's own thread and not use the thread pool any more. It's a bit uglier though :-)
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();
I am working on a winform application, and my goal is to make a label on my form visible to the user, and three seconds later make the label invisible. The issue here is timing out three seconds. I honestly do not know if this was the correct solution to my problem, but I was able to make this work by creating a new thread, and having the new thread Sleep for three seconds (System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(3000)).
I can't use System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(3000) because this freezes my GUI for 3 seconds!
private void someVoid()
{
lbl_authenticationProcess.Text = "Credentials have been verified authentic...";
Thread sleepThreadStart = new Thread(new ThreadStart(newThread_restProgram));
sleepThreadStart.Start();
// Once three seconds has passed / thread has finished: lbl_authenticationProcess.Visible = false;
}
private void newThread_restProgram()
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(3000);
}
So, back to my original question. How can I determine (from my main thread) when the new thread has completed, meaning three seconds has passed?
I am open to new ideas as well as I'm sure there are many.
Right now, you are blocking the entire UI thread in order to hide a label after 3 seconds. If that's what you want, then just user Thread.Sleep(3000) from within the form. If not, though, then you're best off using a Timer:
System.Windows.Forms.Timer timer = new System.Windows.Forms.Timer();
timer.Interval = 3000;
timer.Tick += (s, e) => { this.lbl_authenticationProcess.Visible = false; timer.Stop(); }
timer.Start();
After 3 seconds, the label will disappear. While you're waiting for that, though, a user can still interact with your application.
Note that you must use the Forms version of Timer, since its Tick event is raised on the UI thread, allowing direct access to the control. Other timers can work, but interaction with the control would have to be Invoke/BeginInvoked.
Did you try to use Timer
System.Windows.Forms.Timer t = new System.Windows.Forms.Timer();
t.Interval = 3000;
t.Start();
t.Tick += new EventHandler(t_Tick);
void t_Tick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
label.Visible = false;
}
You really don't need to synchronize anything. You just need a new thread, with a reference to your label. Your code is actually pretty close:
private void someVoid()
{
lbl_authenticationProcess.Text = "Credentials have been verified authentic...";
lbl_authenticationProcess.Visible = true;
Thread sleepThreadStart = new Thread(new ThreadStart(newThread_restProgram));
sleepThreadStart.Start();
}
private void newThread_restProgram()
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(3000);
if (lbl_authenticationProcess.InvokeRequired) {
lbl_authenticationProcess.Invoke(new SimpleCallBack(makeInvisible));
} else {
makeInvisible();
}
}
private void makeInvisible()
{
lbl_authenticationProcess.Visible = false;
}
So, when someVoid() is called, the message on the label is set, the label is made visible. Then a new thread is started with the newThread_restProgram() as the body. The new thread will sleep for 3 seconds (allowing other parts of the program to run), then the sleep ends and the label is made invisible. The new thread ends automatically because it's body method returns.
You can make a method like so:
public void SetLbl(string txt)
{
Invoke((Action)(lbl_authenticationProcess.Text = txt));
}
And you would be able to call it from the second thread, but it invokes on the main thread.
If you're using .NET 3.5 or older, it's kinda a pain:
private void YourMethod()
{
someLabel.BeginInvoke(() =>
{
someLabel.Text = "Something Else";
Thread thread = new Thread(() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(3000);
someLabel.BeginInvoke(() => { someLabel.Visible = false; });
});
thread.Start();
});
}
That should stop you from blocking the UI.
If you're using .NET 4+:
Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
someLabel.BeginInvoke(() => { someLabel.Text = "Something" });
}).ContinueWith(() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(3000);
someLabel.BeginInvoke(() => { someLabel.Visible = false; });
});
If you are willing to download the Async CTP then you could use this really elegant solution which requires the new async and await keywords.1
private void async YourButton_Click(object sender, EventArgs args)
{
// Do authentication stuff here.
lbl_authenticationProcess.Text = "Credentials have been verified authentic...";
await Task.Delay(3000); // TaskEx.Delay in CTP
lbl_authenticationProcess.Visible = false;
}
1Note that the Async CTP uses TaskEx instead of Task.
You can use an AutoResetEvent for your thread synchronization. You set the event to signalled when your secondary thread has woken from it's sleep, so that it can notify your main thread.
That means though that your main thread waits for the other thread to complete.
On that note, you can use SecondThread.Join() to wait for it to complete in your main thread.
You do either of the above, but you don't need to do both.
As suggested in the comments, having a UI thread sleep is not generally a good idea, as it causes unresponsiveness for the user.
However if you do that, you might as well just sleep your main thread and get rid of the extraneous need of the second thread.
I'm not exactly sure this is the right way to do it, but to answer your question, you have to use the Join() function.
public void CallingThread()
{
Thread t = new Thread(myWorkerThread);
t.Join();
}
public void WorkerThread()
{
//Do some stuff
}
You can also add a timeout as parameter to the function, but you don't need that here.
I'm currently writing a little GUI program that does some work and exits afterwards. While work is done, the GUI thread is updated with infos for the user.
This is the pattern I'm currently using and I'm thinking it's not the most elegant one:
static void MainForm_Loaded(BeoExport exporter)
{
// Thread 1 runs the Export
workerThread = new Thread(() =>
{
exporter.StartExport();
// don't exit immediately, so the user sees someting if the work is done fast
Thread.Sleep(1000);
});
// Thread 2 waits for Thread 1 and exits the program afterwards
waiterThread = new Thread(() =>
{
workerThread.Join();
Application.Exit();
});
workerThread.Start();
waiterThread.Start();
}
So what pattern/mechanics would you use to do the same?
To clarify: I was not interested in a way to update the GUI thread. That's already done. This might sound esoteric but I was lookig for the right way to quit the application.
If I could, I would give Dave the credits, since he pointed out the usefulness of the BackgroundWorker.
Have you considered a BackgroundWorker thread instead? You can use its ReportProgress method and ProgressChanged event to update the GUI (with a progress bar perhaps), assuming that you can refactor BeoExport.StartExport method to also report progress. This gives the users visible feedback that work is actually happening.
I don't understand why do you use two threads. You can use threadpool:
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem((state)=>{
exporter.StartExport();
Thread.Sleep(1000);
Application.Exit();
});
I suggest you to use the BackgroundWorker class. It's thought to do the kind of job you're doing. You could do domething like this:
public class Form1 : Form
{
private BackgroundWorker worker;
private ProgressBar bar;
protected override void OnLoad(EventArgs e)
{
base.OnLoad(e);
bar= new ProgressBar();
bar.Dock = DockStyle.Top;
Controls.Add(bar);
worker = new BackgroundWorker();
worker.WorkerReportsProgress=true;
worker.RunWorkerCompleted += delegate
{
Close();
};
worker.ProgressChanged += delegate(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs ev)
{
bar.Value = ev.ProgressPercentage;
};
worker.DoWork += worker_DoWork;
worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
void worker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
//do your work here. For the example, just sleep a bit
//and report progress
for (var i = 0; i < 100;i++ )
{
Thread.Sleep(50);
worker.ReportProgress(i);
}
}
}
You can use an AutoResetEvent. The main thread waits for the autoreset event to be reset.
var wh = new AutoResetEvent(false);
var workerThread = new Thread(() =>
{
exporter.StartExport();
// don't exit immediately, so the user sees something if the work is done fast
Thread.Sleep(5000);
wh.Set();
});
workerThread.Start();
wh.WaitOne();
Application.Current.Shutdown();
Have you taken a look at the Task Parallel Library in .net 4 you can set up a task and the library will work out to best pararellise it for you, either threading, working a seperate CPU core's the is a load of great information about it online.
Regards
Iain
To add a little to Lain's answer, here's a Console sample using a Task from the System.Threading.Tasks namespace.
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Task<int> task = Task<int>.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
Exporter exporter = new Exporter();
int i = exporter.StartExport();
return i;
});
int iResult = task.Result;
Console.WriteLine(iResult);
Console.ReadLine();
}
class Exporter {
public int StartExport()
{
//simulate some work
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(500);
return 5;
}
}
}
Using a BackgroundWorker might help you implement your background processing. If you wanted to stick with your current pattern then consider the following.
static void MainForm_Loaded(BeoExport exporter)
{
workerThread = new Thread(() =>
{
exporter.StartExport();
Thread.Sleep(1000);
MainForm.BeginInvoke(
(Action)(() =>
{
MainForm.Close();
});
});
workerThread.IsBackground = true;
workerThread.Start();
}
Have the worker thread send a notification message of some description to the main thread. The GUI can then either exit or display a "done" message as appropriate.
I am having fun with WPF and got a problem. I have googled and found this website that has the same problem of me but without any working solution.
The problem is that I have a button that do some processing of data (around 30 sec). I want to have the button to disable and to have log writing in a text box... the problem is that it doesn't disable and it doesn't wrote any thing on the textbox until the processing is completely done.
Any idea?
private void button1_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
this.button1.IsEnabled = false;
//Long stuff here
txtLog.AppendText(Environment.NewLine + "Blabla");
//End long stuff here
this.button1.IsEnabled = true;
}
As others have said, use the BackgroundWorker or some other method of doing work asychronously.
You can declare it under your Window, initialize it somewhere like the Loaded event, and use it in the Click event. Here's your method, modified to use BackgroundWorker, assuming you've declared it under the Window as _bw:
private void Window_Loaded(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
_bw = new BackgroundWorker();
_bw.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler((o, args) =>
{
//Long stuff here
this.Dispatcher.Invoke((Action)(() => txtLog.AppendText(Environment.NewLine + "Blabla")));
});
_bw.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler((o, args) =>
{
//End long stuff here
this.Dispatcher.Invoke((Action)(() => this.button1.IsEnabled = true));
});
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
this.button1.IsEnabled = false;
_bw.RunWorkerAsync();
}
Note that anything that modifies your UI from another thread must be done within a Dispatcher.Invoke or Dispatcher.BeginInvoke call, WPF does not allow you to get or set DependencyProperty values from any thread but the one where the object was created (more about this here).
If you wanted to read from txtLog instead of modifying it, the code would be the same:
//Long stuff here
this.Dispatcher.Invoke((Action)(() =>
{
string myLogText = txtLog.Text;
myLogText = myLogText + Environment.NewLine + "Blabla";
txtLog.Text = myLogText;
}));
That operation is being performed on the UI thread. This means that it will block the Windows message pump from processing until it has completed. no pump = no UI updates. You should launch the job on another thread. I don't know WPF, but in C# I would use either the Thread or BackgroundWorker classes.
do it async. create a backgroundworker process to handle the data and the application will continue to respond. MSDN Resources on the Class. Since WPF is using C# (or VB.net) you can still use the same types of threading objects. I've used the background worker successfully in a WPF app myself.