For the sake of simplicity I reproduced my Xamarin nUnit testing error as a console aplication and it shows the same problem that I cannot understand. So first the code that works and second the code that doesn't work.
Simple console app
public class Working
{
private MyViewModel _viewModel;
public Working()
{
Console.WriteLine("Start");
_viewModel = new MyViewModel();
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Working prog = new Working();
prog.Print();
}
public void Print()
{
_viewModel.NewSurveyCommand.Execute(null);
}
}
public class MyViewModel
{
public MyViewModel()
{
NewSurveyCommand = new MyCommand(RunTest);
}
public ICommand NewSurveyCommand { get; private set; }
private void RunTest()
{
Console.WriteLine("Running...");
Thread.Sleep(1000);
Console.WriteLine("Test done");
}
}
public class MyCommand : ICommand
{
private Action _action;
public MyCommand(Action action)
{
_action = action;
}
public event EventHandler CanExecuteChanged;
public bool CanExecute(object parameter)
{
return true;
}
public void Execute(object parameter)
{
_action.Invoke();
}
}
This works fine, the console prints running... then prints test done in one second. Now the second async version which only prints running...
public class Program
{
private ViewModel _viewModel;
public Program()
{
Console.WriteLine("Start");
_viewModel = new ViewModel();
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Program prog = new Program();
prog.Go();
}
async void Go()
{
await Print();
}
public async Task Print()
{
await Task.Run( () => _viewModel.NewSurveyCommand.Execute(null) );
}
}
public class ViewModel
{
public ViewModel()
{
NewSurveyCommand = new Command(async () => await RunTest());
}
public ICommand NewSurveyCommand { get; private set; }
public async Task RunTest()
{
Console.WriteLine("Running...");
await Task.Run( () => Thread.Sleep(1000));
Console.WriteLine("Test done");
}
}
public class Command : ICommand
{
private Action _action;
public Command(Action action)
{
_action = action;
}
public event EventHandler CanExecuteChanged;
public bool CanExecute(object parameter)
{
return true;
}
public void Execute(object parameter)
{
_action.Invoke();
}
}
}
So the second case executes only part of the code, when it gets to await Task.Run( () => Thread.Sleep(1000)); it just leaves the method to never come back. I don't understand why and how to solve that. Has anyone ever come across the same problem. Thanks.
The main thread terminates before Thread.Sleep(1000); has finished and so do all child threads. You can try to add a Thread.Sleep(2000); at the end of your Main method or let it do something else. It should work then. Also have a look at Microsoft's Task class documentation:
Waiting for one or more tasks to complete
Because tasks typically run asynchronously on a thread pool thread, the thread that creates and starts the task continues execution as soon as the task has been instantiated. In some cases, when the calling thread is the main application thread, the app may terminate before any the task actually begins execution. In others, your application's logic may require that the calling thread continue execution only when one or more tasks has completed execution. You can synchronize the execution of the calling thread and the asynchronous tasks it launches by calling a Wait method to wait for one or more tasks to complete.
I hope this helps.
Edit:
You should better use Task.Wait() instead of Thread.Sleep() because often you don't know when a thread will finish:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Program prog = new Program();
Task t = prog.Print();
t.Wait();
}
This doesn't work because you start a new thread in RunTest(). Then the thread created in Print() returns and unblocks the main thread which returns and terminates every thread. You could solve this by running Thread.Sleep() in RunTest() synchronously. Everything would look like this:
public class Program
{
private ViewModel _viewModel;
public Program()
{
Console.WriteLine("Start");
_viewModel = new ViewModel();
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Program prog = new Program();
Task t = prog.Print();
t.Wait();
}
async void Go()
{
await Print();
}
public async Task Print()
{
await Task.Run(() => _viewModel.NewSurveyCommand.Execute(null));
}
}
public class ViewModel
{
public ViewModel()
{
NewSurveyCommand = new Command(() => RunTest());
}
public ICommand NewSurveyCommand { get; private set; }
public void RunTest()
{
Console.WriteLine("Running...");
Thread.Sleep(1000);
Console.WriteLine("Test done");
}
}
public class Command : ICommand
{
private Action _action;
public Command(Action action)
{
_action = action;
}
public event EventHandler CanExecuteChanged;
public bool CanExecute(object parameter)
{
return true;
}
public void Execute(object parameter)
{
_action.Invoke();
}
}
Related
I have a singleton class and a property that gets set from another class (class b), no problem. I want a different class (class a) to wait indefinitely until the property in the singleton class transitions true. I want the most efficient way possible of doing this, so I felt tasks were ideal, but I can't effectively put all of the pieces together. I don't want to continue to poll and sleep thread.sleep.
public class A
{
public static void Main(string[] args)
{
if(!Monitor.Instance.HasChanged)
{
//await until the task in the Monitor class is complete
}
}
}
public class Monitor
{
private static Monitor instance;
private bool _hasChanged;
private Monitor() { }
public static Monitor Instance
{
get
{
if (instance == null)
{
instance = new Monitor();
}
return instance;
}
}
public bool HasChanged
{
get
{
return _hasChanged;
}
set
{
_hasChanged = value;
if (_hasChanged)
{
//kick off a task
}
}
}
}
public class B
{
private static readonly Monitor _instance;
public void DoSomething()
{
Monitor.Instance.HasChanged = true;
}
}
I would use a TaskCompletionSource for this. You would do something like:
public class Monitor
{
private TaskCompletionSource<bool> _changedTaskSource = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>();
public Task HasChangedTask => _changedTaskSource.Task;
public bool HasChanged
...
set
{
...
_changedTaskSource.TrySetResult(true);
}
}
This sets up a task completion source and completes the task when the value changes. You would wait on it like so:
await Monitor.Instance.HasChangedTask;
One thing that is not clear from your question and you will need to address is resetting the task. To do so, just re-create the TaskCompletionSource.
I'm implementing an AsyncManualResetEvent based on Stephen Toub's example. However, I would like to know if the event, or specifically, the underlying Task<T> has been waited on.
I've already investigated the Task class, and there doesn't seem to be a sensible way to determine if it has ever been 'awaited' or if a continuation has been added.
In this case however, I control access to the underlying task source, so I can listen for any calls to the WaitAsync method instead. In thinking about how to do this, I decided to use a Lazy<T> and just see if it has been created.
sealed class AsyncManualResetEvent {
public bool HasWaiters => tcs.IsValueCreated;
public AsyncManualResetEvent() {
Reset();
}
public Task WaitAsync() => tcs.Value.Task;
public void Set() {
if (tcs.IsValueCreated) {
tcs.Value.TrySetResult(result: true);
}
}
public void Reset() {
tcs = new Lazy<TaskCompletionSource<bool>>(LazyThreadSafetyMode.PublicationOnly);
}
Lazy<TaskCompletionSource<bool>> tcs;
}
My question then, is whether this is a safe approach, specifically will this guarantee that there are never any orphaned/lost continuations while the event is being reset?
If you truly wanted to know if anyone called await on your task (not just the fact that they called WaitAsync()) you could make a custom awaiter that acts as a wrapper for the TaskAwaiter that is used by m_tcs.Task.
public class AsyncManualResetEvent
{
private volatile Completion _completion = new Completion();
public bool HasWaiters => _completion.HasWaiters;
public Completion WaitAsync()
{
return _completion;
}
public void Set()
{
_completion.Set();
}
public void Reset()
{
while (true)
{
var completion = _completion;
if (!completion.IsCompleted ||
Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref _completion, new Completion(), completion) == completion)
return;
}
}
}
public class Completion
{
private readonly TaskCompletionSource<bool> _tcs;
private readonly CompletionAwaiter _awaiter;
public Completion()
{
_tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>(TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously);
_awaiter = new CompletionAwaiter(_tcs.Task, this);
}
public CompletionAwaiter GetAwaiter() => _awaiter;
public bool IsCompleted => _tcs.Task.IsCompleted;
public bool HasWaiters { get; private set; }
public void Set() => _tcs.TrySetResult(true);
public struct CompletionAwaiter : ICriticalNotifyCompletion
{
private readonly TaskAwaiter _taskAwaiter;
private readonly Completion _parent;
internal CompletionAwaiter(Task task, Completion parent)
{
_parent = parent;
_taskAwaiter = task.GetAwaiter();
}
public bool IsCompleted => _taskAwaiter.IsCompleted;
public void GetResult() => _taskAwaiter.GetResult();
public void OnCompleted(Action continuation)
{
_parent.HasWaiters = true;
_taskAwaiter.OnCompleted(continuation);
}
public void UnsafeOnCompleted(Action continuation)
{
_parent.HasWaiters = true;
_taskAwaiter.UnsafeOnCompleted(continuation);
}
}
}
Now if anyone registered a continuation with OnCompleted or UnsafeOnCompleted the bool HasWaiters will become true.
I also added TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously to fix the issue Stephen fixes with the Task.Factory.StartNew at the end of the article (It was introduced to .NET after the article was written).
If you just want to see if anyone called WaitAsync you can simplify it a lot, you just need a class to hold your flag and your completion source.
public class AsyncManualResetEvent
{
private volatile CompletionWrapper _completionWrapper = new CompletionWrapper();
public Task WaitAsync()
{
var wrapper = _completionWrapper;
wrapper.WaitAsyncCalled = true;
return wrapper.Tcs.Task;
}
public bool WaitAsyncCalled
{
get { return _completionWrapper.WaitAsyncCalled; }
}
public void Set() {
_completionWrapper.Tcs.TrySetResult(true); }
public void Reset()
{
while (true)
{
var wrapper = _completionWrapper;
if (!wrapper.Tcs.Task.IsCompleted ||
Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref _completionWrapper, new CompletionWrapper(), wrapper) == wrapper)
return;
}
}
private class CompletionWrapper
{
public TaskCompletionSource<bool> Tcs { get; } = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>(TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously);
public bool WaitAsyncCalled { get; set; }
}
}
The example below functions fine, but I want to have the Complete event fire its event handlers in the UI thread. I don't want HasCompleted() to have to worry about checking if it's on the UI thread or not. Calls to HasCompleted() should always be invoked on the UI thread. How do I do this?
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var game = new Game();
game.Complete += HasCompleted;
game.Load();
}
private void HasCompleted()
{
if (label1.InvokeRequired)
{
label1.BeginInvoke(new Action(() => label1.Text = "complete"));
}
else
{
label1.Text = "complete";
}
}
}
public class Game
{
public Game()
{
}
public event MethodInvoker Complete;
public void Load()
{
var task = new Task(new Action(() =>
{
Thread.Sleep(500);
OnComplete();
}));
task.Start();
}
private void OnComplete()
{
if (Complete != null)
{
Complete();
}
}
}
Capture the current synchronization context when you create the Game object and use that to marshal the event to the context that was current when the object was first created:
public class Game
{
private SynchronizationContext context;
public Game()
{
context = SynchronizationContext.Current ??
new SynchronizationContext();
}
public MethodInvoker Complete;
public void Load()
{
//...
}
private void OnComplete()
{
if (Complete != null)
{
context.Post(_ => Complete(), null);
}
}
}
When using the StartNew() method to kick off a process on a new thread, I need to figure out how to make another call into this object in that same thread (I assume this would be some sort of Join operation?).
The following example is dumbed down to illustrate the meat of what I am trying to do. I am well aware it is severely lacking in basic concurrency considerations. But I didn't want to cloud the code with all of that logic, so please forgive me on that.
The following console app shows what I am trying to accomplish. Assume on the StartNew() call a new thread with ID 9976 is created and the method invoked there. I would like the subsequent call to ProcessImmediate() in the file system watcher change event handler to be made on thread 9976 as well. As it stands, the call would share the same thread that is used for the file system watcher change event.
Can this be done, and if so, how?
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var runner = new Runner();
runner.Run();
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
public class Runner
{
private Activity _activity = null;
private FileSystemWatcher _fileSystemWatcher;
public void Run()
{
_activity = new Activity();
// start activity on a new thread
Task.Factory.StartNew(() => _activity.Go());
_fileSystemWatcher = new FileSystemWatcher();
_fileSystemWatcher.Filter = "*.watcher";
_fileSystemWatcher.Path = "c:\temp";
_fileSystemWatcher.Changed += FileSystemWatcher_Changed;
_fileSystemWatcher.EnableRaisingEvents = true;
}
private void FileSystemWatcher_Changed(object sender, FileSystemEventArgs e)
{
// WANT TO CALL THIS FOR ACTIVITY RUNNING ON PREVIOUSLY CALLED THREAD
_activity.ProcessImmediate();
}
}
public class Activity
{
public void Go()
{
while (!Stop)
{
// for purposes of this example, magically assume that ProcessImmediate has not been called when this is called
DoSomethingInteresting();
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(2000);
}
}
protected virtual void DoSomethingInteresting() { }
public void ProcessImmediate()
{
// for purposes of this example, assume that Go is magically in its sleep state when ProcessImmediate is called
DoSomethingInteresting();
}
public bool Stop { get; set; }
}
}
* UPDATE *
Thanks for the excellent responses. I took Mike's suggestion and implemented it for my console app. Below is the full working code which also includes the use of a cancellation token. I post this in case someone else might find it useful.
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var runner = new Runner();
runner.Run();
Console.ReadKey();
runner.Stop();
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
public class Runner
{
private Activity _activity = null;
private FileSystemWatcher _fileSystemWatcher;
private CancellationTokenSource _cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
public void Stop() { _cts.Cancel(); }
public void Run()
{
_activity = new Activity();
// start activity on a new thread
var task = new Task(() => _activity.Go(_cts.Token), _cts.Token, TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning);
task.Start();
_fileSystemWatcher = new FileSystemWatcher();
_fileSystemWatcher.Filter = "*.watcher";
_fileSystemWatcher.Path = "C:\\Temp\\FileSystemWatcherPath";
_fileSystemWatcher.Changed += FileSystemWatcher_Changed;
_fileSystemWatcher.EnableRaisingEvents = true;
}
private void FileSystemWatcher_Changed(object sender, FileSystemEventArgs e)
{
// WANT TO CALL THIS FOR ACTIVITY RUNNING ON PREVIOUSLY CALLED THREAD
_activity.ProcessImmediate();
}
}
public class Activity : IDisposable
{
private AutoResetEvent _processing = new AutoResetEvent(false);
public void Go(CancellationToken ct)
{
Thread.CurrentThread.Name = "Go";
while (!ct.IsCancellationRequested)
{
// for purposes of this example, magically assume that ProcessImmediate has not been called when this is called
DoSomethingInteresting();
_processing.WaitOne(5000);
}
Console.WriteLine("Exiting");
}
protected virtual void DoSomethingInteresting()
{
Console.WriteLine(string.Format("Doing Something Interesting on thread {0}", Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId));
}
public void ProcessImmediate()
{
// for purposes of this example, assume that Go is magically in its sleep state when ProcessImmediate is called
_processing.Set();
}
public void Dispose()
{
if (_processing != null)
{
_processing.Dispose();
_processing = null;
}
}
}
}
First, you should use TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning if you are creating a task that will not complete quickly. Second, use an AutoResetEvent to signal the waiting thread to wake up. Note that below ProcessImmediate will return before DoSomethingInteresting has completed running on the other thread. Example:
using System.Threading;
public class Activity : IDisposable
{
private AutoResetEvent _processing = new AutoResetEvent(false);
public void Go()
{
while (!Stop)
{
// for purposes of this example, magically assume that ProcessImmediate has not been called when this is called
DoSomethingInteresting();
_processing.WaitOne(2000);
}
}
protected virtual void DoSomethingInteresting() { }
public void ProcessImmediate()
{
_processing.Set();
}
public bool Stop { get; set; }
public void Dispose()
{
if (_processing != null)
{
_processing.Dispose();
_processing = null;
}
}
}
User mike has given a better solution, which will be appropriate when you like to call the same method immediately. If you want to call a different methods immediately I'll expand mike's answer to achieve that.
using System.Threading;
public class Activity : IDisposable
{
private AutoResetEvent _processing = new AutoResetEvent(false);
private ConcurrentQueue<Action> actionsToProcess = new ConcurrentQueue<Action>();
public void Go()
{
while (!Stop)
{
// for purposes of this example, magically assume that ProcessImmediate has not been called when this is called
DoSomethingInteresting();
_processing.WaitOne(2000);
while(!actionsToProcess.IsEmpty)
{
Action action;
if(actionsToProcess.TryDeque(out action))
action();
}
}
}
protected virtual void DoSomethingInteresting() { }
public void ProcessImmediate(Action action)
{
actionsToProcess.Enqueue(action);
_processing.Set();
}
public bool Stop { get; set; }
public void Dispose()
{
if (_processing != null)
{
_processing.Dispose();
_processing = null;
}
}
}
To execute different methods on the same thread you can use a message loop that dispatches incoming requests. A simple option would be to use the event loop scheduler of the Reactive Extensions and to "recursively" schedule your Go() function - if in the mean time a different operation is scheduled it would be processed before the next Go() operation.
Here is a sample:
class Loop
: IDisposable
{
IScheduler scheduler = new EventLoopScheduler();
MultipleAssignmentDisposable stopper = new MultipleAssignmentDisposable();
public Loop()
{
Next();
}
void Next()
{
if (!stopper.IsDisposed)
stopper.Disposable = scheduler.Schedule(Handler);
}
void Handler()
{
Thread.Sleep(1000);
Console.WriteLine("Handler: {0}", Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId);
Next();
}
public void Notify()
{
scheduler.Schedule(() =>
{
Console.WriteLine("Notify: {0}", Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId);
});
}
public void Dispose()
{
stopper.Dispose();
}
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
using (var l = new Loop())
{
Console.WriteLine("Press 'q' to quit.");
while (Console.ReadKey().Key != ConsoleKey.Q)
l.Notify();
}
}
Let's say I have an exposed interface as such:
interface IMyService
{
MyResult MyOperation();
}
This operation is synchronous and returns a value.
My implemented interface has to do the following:
Call an asynchronous method
Wait for event #1
Wait for event #2
This is due to a 3rd party COM object I am working with.
This code looks similar to the following
public MyResult MyOperation()
{
_myCOMObject.AsyncOperation();
//Here I need to wait for both events to fire before returning
}
private void MyEvent1()
{
//My Event 1 is fired in this handler
}
private void MyEvent2()
{
//My Event 2 is fired in this handler
}
My two events can happen in either order, it is quite random.
What is the proper threading mechanism I can use to synchronize this? I was using ManualResetEvent before I had to start waiting for the second event, and have not seen an easy way to use it for both events. These 2 events set variables that allow me to create the return value for MyOperation().
Any ideas on a good implementation for this? I have no control over the way the 3rd party object is implemented.
Two ManualResetEvents should do the trick for you. Just initialize them to false before you call the _myCOMObject.AsyncOperation(). Like this:
private ManualResetEvent event1;
private ManualResetEvent event2;
public MyResult MyOperation()
{
event1 = new ManualResetEvent(false);
event2 = new ManualResetEvent(false);
_myCOMObject.AsyncOperation();
WaitHandle.WaitAll(new WaitHandle[] { event1, event2 });
}
private void MyEvent1()
{
event1.Set();
}
private void MyEvent2()
{
event2.Set();
}
Edit
Thanks for the comments. I've changed the wait call to use WaitAll
My implementation example is as follows:
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
class Program
{
private static WaitHandle[] waitHandles;
private static event EventHandler Evt1;
private static event EventHandler Evt2;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
waitHandles = new WaitHandle[]{
new ManualResetEvent(false),
new ManualResetEvent(false)
};
Evt1 += new EventHandler(Program_Evt1);
Evt2 += new EventHandler(Program_Evt2);
OnEvt1();
OnEvt2();
WaitHandle.WaitAll(waitHandles);
Console.WriteLine("Finished");
Console.ReadLine();
}
static void Program_Evt2(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Thread.Sleep(2000);
((ManualResetEvent)waitHandles[0]).Set();
}
static void Program_Evt1(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
((ManualResetEvent)waitHandles[1]).Set();
}
static void OnEvt1()
{
if (Evt1 != null)
Evt1(null, EventArgs.Empty);
}
static void OnEvt2()
{
if (Evt2 != null)
Evt2(null, EventArgs.Empty);
}
}
}
I make it sleep for the purposes of this example and the WaitAll functionality
Cheers,
Andrew
P.S. another example would be using AsyncCallback, really quick and dirty example, but gives you more keys to open the door with :-) . Hope this helps!!
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
class Program
{
private static WaitHandle[] waitHandles;
private static event EventHandler Evt1;
private static event EventHandler Evt2;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
waitHandles = new WaitHandle[]{
new ManualResetEvent(false),
new ManualResetEvent(false)
};
var callabck1 = new AsyncCallback(OnEvt1);
var callabck2 = new AsyncCallback(OnEvt2);
callabck1.Invoke(new ManualResetResult(null, (ManualResetEvent)waitHandles[0]));
callabck2.Invoke(new ManualResetResult(null, (ManualResetEvent)waitHandles[1]));
WaitHandle.WaitAll(waitHandles);
Console.WriteLine("Finished");
Console.ReadLine();
}
static void OnEvt1(IAsyncResult result)
{
Console.WriteLine("Setting1");
var handle = result.AsyncWaitHandle;
((ManualResetEvent)handle).Set();
}
static void OnEvt2(IAsyncResult result)
{
Thread.Sleep(2000);
Console.WriteLine("Setting2");
var handle = result.AsyncWaitHandle;
((ManualResetEvent)handle).Set();
}
}
public class ManualResetResult : IAsyncResult
{
private object _state;
private ManualResetEvent _handle;
public ManualResetResult(object state, ManualResetEvent handle)
{
_state = state;
_handle = handle;
}
#region IAsyncResult Members
public object AsyncState
{
get { return _state; }
}
public WaitHandle AsyncWaitHandle
{
get { return _handle; }
}
public bool CompletedSynchronously
{
get { throw new NotImplementedException(); }
}
public bool IsCompleted
{
get { throw new NotImplementedException(); }
}
#endregion
}
}
I am not sure I understood your question, but AutoResetEvent.WaitAll seems to solve your problem, if I got it right. It allows you to set more than one handler and it will only be released when all are set.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/z6w25xa6.aspx