This question already has answers here:
Captured variable in a loop in C#
(10 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
why the varialbe is 2 in the loop?
and it is the 1st breakpoint the program meet in the loop.
Because by the time your breakpoint was hit in the new thread, the main thread had already looped twice. Remember, they're running on separate threads, so unless you use some kind of synchronization mechanism, you won't be able to predict what occurs when.
Related
This question already has answers here:
How can I write on another process memory?
(4 answers)
How to remote invoke another process method from C# application
(2 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
I've been starting to do some decompiling of my C# programs and got some interesting results by editing the dlls, but is it possible to change values and call functions in a running process given that I know what the names of the variables or functions are?
Doesn't any cheat to any game do exactly that?
I mean, if I understand you correctly, there is software called
Cheat Engine which allows you to modify process variables values, inject dll's and much more.
This question already has answers here:
Detecting whether on UI thread in WPF and Winforms
(12 answers)
Closed 4 years ago.
The title says it all. I would like to be able to simply detect if work is being executed on the UI thread. Also, if the method is not running on the UI/main thread, can I determine what other thread that it might be? I would like to use this information for debugging purposes. Thanks!
In a UWP app, you can check and store the value of the Environment.CurrentManagedThreadId property when your app starts and then compare the current value of the same property with the stored value to determine whether you are on the same thread.
Or use the CoreDispatcher.HasThreadAccess property to determine whether the current thread can safely update the UI.
This question already has answers here:
Call a method (with an argument) after a delay
(3 answers)
Fire method after variable amount of time
(2 answers)
How to call a method after so many seconds?
(5 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
I'm trying to call an method in this if statement after a certain time (15 seconds) has ended, but it doesn't seem to work at all not print out the text in the method. How would I go about doing this, I have tried researching on how the stopwatch works but it doesn't seem to be working. Thank your for your help.
I have tried this code
Stopwatch watch = Stopwatch.StartNew();
if (watch.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds == 15)
{
Method();
}
Task is what you need
Task.Delay(new TimeSpan(0, 0, 15)).ContinueWith(o => { Method(); });
More about Asynchronous programming here
What you are trying to do is to halt your execution for a short while, and then invoke the method.
The most trivial way to do so is:
Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(15));
Method();
But note that your thread is not doing anything during this time, so a better way would be to use the TPL, and async methods, but for your needs the code above will probably do :)
This question already has answers here:
Executing a function periodically after the function completes its task
(2 answers)
Automatically send text every 10 seconds
(4 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
I have two solutions. 1 for the datagrid view ( for display purposes only) and one for the input.
Is there a alternative way of refreshing datagrid every second? or if not every second. Is there anything I can use?
I've read about backgroundwoker
, but it also needs to fire the backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerAsync();
This question already has answers here:
When should the volatile keyword be used in C#?
(11 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
Is there any case in which volatile is useful in the context of single-threaded programming? I know it's used to make sure the value of the variable is always actually checked in memory so is there any case in which that value may change (in a ST app) in a way that the app/compiler won't notice?
No, it's not necessary. It is used to synchronize the memory content between the threads which in case you have only one it doesn't make sense.