I have a class with properties that are bound to my view. To keep my view up-to-date, I implement INotifyPropertyChanged and raise the event everytime some property changes.
Now I got some heavy functions that freeze my application. I want to put them into a background task.
First: here my current approach
(e.g. on button click)
private async void HeavyFunc()
{
foreach (var stuff)
{
count += await Task.Run(() => stuff.Fetch());
}
if (count == 0)
//...
}
stuff class
public async Task<int> Fetch()
{
//network stuff
RaisePropertyChanged("MyProperty");
}
public async void RaisePropertyChanged(string pChangedProperty)
{
await Application.Current.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(
System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherPriority.Normal,
new ThreadStart(() =>
{
PropertyChanged?.Invoke(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(pChangedProperty);
}
);
}
The code above gives an exception ("DependencySource" must be created in the same thread like "DependencyObject").
AFAIK, you generally need to create a new thread and run it (while awaiting it). ´await Task.Run(...);´ should do this job.
Since the PropertyChanged event directly influences the UI, calling it in the UI thread seems to be a good decision. This is why I call Dispatcher.BeginInvoke.
What I don't understand: the exception above is caused when different threads are responsible for the data. But I explicitely calling the event on my UI-thread and the object should be created by the UI-thread too. So why do I get an exception?
My main question is: How do I implement the events for the INotifyPropertyChanged interface generally to avoid or handle most of the async programming problems like above? What should be considered while constructing the functions?
Now I got some heavy functions that freeze my application.
If you're really doing asynchronous "network stuff", then it shouldn't be freezing the app.
My main question is: How do I implement the events for the INotifyPropertyChanged interface generally to avoid or handle most of the async programming problems like above?
The approach that I prefer is to not handle this in the event raising code. Instead, structure the rest of your code so that it respects the UI layer.
In other words, divide your "service" (or "business logic") code from your "UI" code so that it works like this:
// In StuffService class:
public async Task<Result> FetchAsync()
{
//network stuff
return result;
}
// In StuffViewModel class:
public async void ButtonClicked()
{
foreach (var stuff)
{
var result = await Task.Run(() => _stuffService.FetchAsync());
MyProperty = result.MyProperty;
count += result.Count;
}
if (count == 0)
//...
}
public Property MyProperty
{
get { return _myProperty; }
set
{
_myProperty = value;
RaisePropertyChanged();
}
}
private void RaisePropertyChanged([CallerMemberName] string pChangedProperty = null)
{
PropertyChanged?.Invoke(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(pChangedProperty));
}
This way, there's no manual thread jumping, all properties have the standard ViewModel implementation, the code is simpler and more maintainable, etc.
I did leave in the call to Task.Run, although this should be superfluous if your network calls are truly asynchronous.
Related
I'm having an issue with updating WPF UI with the RX. Currently I have a class that has an event which is called within its functions. Event is subscribed from the UI thread and updates the UI like below :
SomeClass.cs
public partial class SomeClass
{
public delegate Task ProgressUpdate(string value);
public delegate Task BarUpdate(int value);
public event ProgressUpdate OnProgressUpdateList;
public event BarUpdate OnProgressUpdateBar;
public async Task DoSomething()
{
// execute code
<some code>
// update UI
if (OnProgressUpdateList != null)
{
OnProgressUpdateList(update);
}
}
}
And in MainWindow.xaml
var someClass = new SomeClass();
someClass.OnProgressUpdateList += Export_OnProgressUpdateList;
someClass.OnProgressUpdateBar += Export_OnProgressUpdateBar;
private async Task Export_OnProgressUpdateList(string text)
{
await Dispatcher.InvokeAsync(() =>
{
OutputLog.AppendText(text);
OutputLog.AppendText(Environment.NewLine);
OutputLog.ScrollToEnd();
});
}
This code works except the program processes huge number of files and I'm assuming this is why the UI becomes frozen very quickly (I see the updates being done in the first half a second). I searched for a way around this and I came into a solution to use RX for batching the UI calls. I've searched through several SO posts but I couldn't find an answer on how to correctly implements this (or convert C# events to RX observables) when I call those events from the class and subscribe to this event from outside that class. Can someone help me understand this?
I'm posting an answer to myself as I couldn't get one here and I finally figured it out so for anyone looking for that in the future - here you go:
public partial class SomeClass {
public Subject<string> outputLogSubject = new Subject<string>();
public IObservable<string> OutputLog => outputLogSubject.AsObservable();
//Add string for collection updating UI
outputLogSubject.OnNext(string);
//After finishing the work you can call outputLogSubject.OnCompleted() to stop buffering
outputLogSubject.OnCompleted();
}
It needs to be added in the class that will be calling the executing the work.
Below needs to be added in the UI thread after initialization and BEFORE processing work :
var buffer = someClass.OutputLog.Buffer(TimeSpan.FromMilliseconds(1000), 6);
var chunked = buffer.ObserveOnDispatcher(DispatcherPriority.Background);
var update = chunked.Subscribe(name =>
{
foreach (var item in name)
{
OutputLog.AppendText(item);
}
OutputLog.ScrollToEnd();
});
This allowed me to keep the UI responsive to the point of seeing the output log is real time
I'm wondering is it safe to call async method in a constructor in the following way:
Let's say we have an async method Refresh that is fetching data from the internet. We are also using Reactive Extensions to notify everyone that is interested that new data was fetched.
I'm wondering is it safe to call Refresh first time in a class constructor? Can I use such construction?
Task.Run(Refresh);
or
Refresh().ConfigureAwait(false)
I'm not really interested here if the method has finished or not, since I will get notified through Reactive Extensions when data is fetched.
Is it ok to do something like this?
public class MyClass
{
BehvaiorSubject<Data> _dataObservable = new BehvaiorSubject(Data.Default);
IObservable DataObservable => _dataObservable;
public MyClass()
{
Refresh().ConfigureAwait(false);
}
public async Task Refresh()
{
try
{
var data = await FetchDataFromNetwork();
_dataObservable.OnNext(data);
}
catch (VariousExceptions e)
{
//do some appropriate stuff
}
catch(Exception)
{
//do some appropriate stuff
}
}
}
Though people are against the idea, we have similar things in our project :)
The thing is you have to properly handle any exceptions thrown from that Task in case they go unobserved. Also you might need to expose the task via either a method or a property, just so that it is possible to await (when necessary) the async part is finished.
class MyClass
{
public MyClass()
{
InitTask = Task.Delay(3000);
// Handle task exception.
InitTask.ContinueWith(task => task.Exception, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
}
public Task InitTask { get; }
}
I have an WPF application based on MVVM architecture. I am implementing the common and widely used INotifyPropertyChanged interface on my ViewModels, because I need to react on user interaction.
But how do I perform an asynchronous action (e.g. loading some data) from within the synchronous PropertyChanged event handler without using async void 'hacks'?
Thanks in advance!
EDIT
The main reason why i need to avoid async void is because I am working in an test driven environment. Async void methods are not testable :(
Actually, this is not about async void.
Usually you want to fire async operation and let your property setter return.
Sample snippet:
private string carManufacturerFilter;
public string СarManufacturerFilter
{
get { return carManufacturerFilter; }
set
{
if (carManufacturerFilter != value)
{
carManufacturerFilter = value;
OnPropertyChanged();
// fire async operation and forget about it here;
// you don't need it to complete right now;
var _ = RefreshCarsListAsync();
}
}
}
private async Task RefreshCarsListAsync()
{
// call some data service
var cars = await someDataService.GetCarsAsync(carManufacturerFilter)
.ConfigureAwait(false);
// ...
}
Note, that there are a lot of things to add here:
since this is fire-and-forget approach, you need to block user input until operation is running. In other words, there should be some sort of busy indicator;
you may want to delay async operation firing. This is usually applicable, when there are string properties. You don't want to fire async operation after each char typed by user. Instead it's desirable to wait user to complete input;
there could be several properties, which fire the same async operation (imagine complex data filter). Some of them should fire operation immediately (e.g. checkbox), some of them need delay before firing;
you need to handle exceptions inside async method and display errors somehow.
P.S. I strongly recommend you to take a look at Reactive UI.
The reason async void is supported is to allow using await in event handlers, which are usually void.
If you want it to be testable, write the entire code in another async Task method and have the event handler call it directly. Test this method in your tests.
void OnPropertyChanged(PropertyChangedEventArgs e)
{
OnPropertyChangedAsync(e)
}
// Test this method
async Task OnPropertyChangedAsync(PropertyChangedEventArgs e)
{
...
}
Little late to the party but I'd say this. First, notice that INotifyPropertyChanged says that your view model will implement
public event PropertyChangedEventHandler? PropertyChanged;
Secondly, if you inspect PropertyChangedEventHandler, you'll see that it's a delegate, of course:
public delegate void PropertyChangedEventHandler(object? sender, PropertyChangedEventArgs e);
So why not implement your own delegate using Func<>? For example, if you're looking to stick with the (object? sender, PropertyChangedEventArgs e) parameter pattern that PropertyChanged uses, then I would implement something like
public Func<object?, PropertyChangedEventArgs, Task>? PropertyChangedAsync { get; set; }
in the same place (or in place of) public event PropertyChangedEventHandler? PropertyChanged;.
From there you can "wire it up" just as you would PropertyChanged:
ViewModel.PropertyChanged += OnViewModelPropertyChanged;
ViewModel.PropertyChangedAsync += OnViewModelPropertyChangedAsync;
private void OnViewModelPropertyChanged(object sender, PropertyChangedEventArgs e)
{
// Do something (synchronously) with the notification
}
private Task OnViewModelPropertyChangedAsync(object? sender, PropertyChangedEventArgs e)
{
// Do something (asynchronously) with the notification
return Task.CompletedTask;
}
By the way, if you really want to get fancy, you could also create a custom PropertyChangedEventHandler event with an interface very similar to INotifyPropertyChanged. Obviously, the only difference is you'd want to return Task or Task<T> instead of void. The solution that I mentioned above using Func<object?, PropertyChangedEventArgs, Task> is just a lot more concise (one line).
You can't. INotifyPropertyChanged doesn't support async calls. You need to do a hack, or rethink you strategy.
INotifyPropertyChanged is not intended for async actions. Its goal is to enable a class notify the UI that its data has changed. The UI works in a dedicated thread, so cross-thread operations must be avoided.
You should use the "dreaded" async void approach.
You can also use Dispatcher.BeingInvoke (async () => { … await …} ), but it will be the same as using async void.
I wonder if there's a better approach to load async data into a property. now I create an async function and raise a Task in the Get part of the property like this:
private ObservableCollection<CProyecto> prope;
public ObservableCollection<CProyecto> Prope
{
get
{
if (prope == null)
{
Task.Run(()=> LoadData()).Wait();
}
return proyectos;
}
set
{
prope = value;
RaisePropertyChanged();
}
}
async private Task LoadData()
{
Prope = await clsStaticClassDataLoader.GetDataFromWebService();
}
This approach works, but I don't like the use of .Wait, because that can freeze the screen if the service doesn´t respond fast.
Can you please guide me on this matter?
thanks in advance
The way I handled this was to start the process of loading the property when the object was constructed, but I did not await the result. Since the property notifies when it is populated, the bindings worked just fine. Essentially it works like this:
public class MyClass : INotifyPropertyChanged
{
private ObservableCollection<CProyecto> prope;
public ObservableCollection<CProyecto> Prope
{
get { return prope; }
set { prope = value; RaisePropertyChanged(nameof(Prope)); }
}
public MyClass()
{
// Don't wait or await. When it's ready
// the UI will get notified.
LoadData();
}
async private Task LoadData()
{
Prope = await clsStaticClassDataLoader.GetDataFromWebService();
}
}
This works very well, and does not cause any delays or stuttering in the UI. If you want the collection to never be null (a good practice IMO), you can pre-initialize the prope field with an empty collection.
I suggest you read my MSDN article on async MVVM data-binding. I have a library (github link) that provides a NotifyTask<T> type, which can be used as such:
public class MyClass : INotifyPropertyChanged
{
public NotifyTask<ObservableCollection<CProyecto>> Prope { get; private set; }
public MyClass()
{
// Synchronously *start* the operation.
Prope = NotifyTask.Create(LoadDataAsync());
}
async private Task<ObservableCollection<CProyecto>> LoadDataAsync()
{
return await clsStaticClassDataLoader.GetDataFromWebService();
}
}
Then your databinding would operate on Prope.Result.
The advantage of this approach is that you can also use databinding to hide/show busy indicators (Prope.IsNotCompleted), show controls when the data is available (Prope.IsSuccessfullyCompleted), and error notifications (Prope.IsFaulted / Prope.ErrorMessage).
Also, you can specify a non-null default value, if you wish:
Prope = NotifyTask.Create(LoadDataAsync(), new ObservableCollection<CProyecto>());
Your current implementation of the Prope property doesn't make much sense. It is pointless to execute the LoadData method on a background thread since you block the main thread anyway when you call Wait(). You might as well call Wait() directly on the task returned by the LoadData() method:
//BAD IMPLEMENTATION!
private ObservableCollection<CProyecto> prope;
public ObservableCollection<CProyecto> Prope
{
get
{
if (prope == null)
LoadData().Wait();
return proyectos;
}
set { prope = value; RaisePropertyChanged(); }
}
The above implementation is still a bad one. The getter of a property is not supposed to perform an asynchronous operation. You should read #Stephen Cleary's blog post on the subject: https://blog.stephencleary.com/2013/01/async-oop-3-properties.html
...and look into his NotifyTaskCompletion type in his AsyncEx library: https://github.com/StephenCleary/AsyncEx
This is probably a really basic question, please bear with me, I'm still very new to the world of WPF/C#.
I have a WPF app where I open a new window if a button is clicked.
The window is called Sync and all it does is instantiate a viewmodel class which contains some public properties that are bound to my view.
The viewmodel also instantiates a class containing a lot of business logic, this updates the ViewModel's bound properties, the aim being to update the content of my window.
This sort of works, but only when all of the (sometimes quite lengthy) processing is completed does the window load and the view is populated with the last value of the ViewModel's properties.
I think I'm missing something pretty basic here. How do I get my window to instantly load and then have the view update when any of the properties have changed? Should I be listening for a PropertyChanged event and then updating the view? Where do i do this? Within the view model's setter?
Here's some simplified code:
Calling my window from my main window's View Model
public void SyncAction()
{
Sync syncWindow = new Sync();
syncWindow.Show();
syncWindow.Activate();
}
The window
public partial class Sync : Window
{
public Sync()
{
InitializeComponent();
var viewModel = new SyncViewModel();
}
}
The view model
class SyncViewModel
{
private string _miscStatus = "";
public SyncViewModel()
{
var sync = new SyncLogic();
sync.SyncAll(this);
}
public string MiscStatus
{
get
{
return _miscStatus;
}
set
{
_miscStatus += value;
}
}
}
Some business logic
class SyncLogic
{
private ViewModel.SyncViewModel _syncViewModel;
public void SyncAll(ViewModel.SyncViewModel syncViewModel)
{
_syncViewModel = syncViewModel;
// lock our synctime
var syncTime = DateTools.getNow();
_syncViewModel.MiscStatus = "Sync starting at " + syncTime.ToString();
// Do lots of other stuff
_syncViewModel.MiscStatus = String.Format("Sync finished at at {0}, total time taken {1}",
DateTools.getNow().ToString(), (DateTools.getNow() - syncTime).ToString());
}
}
Bonus question: The way I'm updating the view from within my business logic (by passing in a reference to the viewmodel and updating its properties from there) seems a bit kludgy. I definitely want to keep the business logic separate, but am not sure how I can pass any output back out to the viewmodel. What would be a better way of doing this please?
Why do you care whether the update takes visual effect before or after the code finishes executing? The internal properties are updated immediately; any code that queries the UI will see the new values.
The only time the user will be able to perceive a difference between an update during execution vs after execution is if you have a long-running computation on the UI thread. Don't do that.
Instead, run the computation asynchronously with the UI, so that repaint messages can be processed meanwhile. You can do this using a background thread, but the new easier way with C# 4 and later is async. Because async is implemented using continuation messages to the UI thread, you don't need to synchronize data access or marshal UI access between threads. It just works, and very well. The only thing you need to do is to break your code into small enough chunks, each implemented as an async method, that you don't cause noticeable delay.
What I would do:
Don't do any heavy logic in the ViewModel constructor. Constructor should only initialize object and do nothing else. In your example, constructor should be empty.
public SyncViewModel()
{
}
SyncLogic should not be aware of the ViewModel. Introduce some other class to communicate input arguments and sync results. Let's say SyncArguments and SyncResult.
class SyncLogic
{
public SyncResult SyncAll(SyncArguments syncArgs)
{
var syncResult = new SyncResult();
// Do lots of other stuff
// populate syncResult
return syncResult;
}
}
Introduce a method in the viewmodel that should be called to do the "sync" logic, and make that method async. That way it's very easy to do the heavy stuff in the background and leave the UI thread to do the job it should do, draw the UI.
public async Task Sync()
{
// lock our synctime
var syncTime = DateTools.getNow();
MiscStatus = "Sync starting at " + syncTime.ToString();
var sync = new SyncLogic();
var syncArgs = new SyncArguments();
//populate syncArgs from ViewModel data
//call the SyncAll as new Task so it will be executed as background operation
//and "await" the result
var syncResults = await Task.Factory.StartNew(()=>sync.SyncAll(syncArgs));
//when the Task completes your execution will continue here and you can populate the
//ViewModel with results
MiscStatus = String.Format("Sync finished at at {0}, total time taken {1}",
DateTools.getNow().ToString(), (DateTools.getNow() - syncTime).ToString());
}
Make the button click event handler that creates and shows the window async, so you can call Sync method on the ViewModel
private void async Button_click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Sync syncWindow = new Sync();
var viewModel = new SyncViewModel();
syncWindow.DataContext = viewModel;
syncWindow.Show();
syncWindow.Activate();
await viewModel.Sync();
}
That will draw the Window without waiting on the Sync method. When the Sync taks completes, viewmodel properties will be populated from the SyncResult and the Bindings will draw them on screen.
Hope you get the idea, sorry if there are some errors in my code, not sure that it all compiles.
First, make sure to set the viewmodel as the view's DataContext:
public partial class Sync : Window
{
public Sync()
{
InitializeComponent();
var viewModel = new SyncViewModel();
DataContext = viewModel;
}
}
Second, you'll have to run the "sync" stuff on a background thread. This is easiest with the async+await keywords in .Net 4.5:
public async void SyncAll(ViewModel.SyncViewModel syncViewModel)
{
_syncViewModel = syncViewModel;
// lock our synctime
var syncTime = DateTools.getNow();
_syncViewModel.MiscStatus = "Sync starting at " + syncTime.ToString();
await Task.Factory.StartNew(() => {
// Do lots of other stuff
});
_syncViewModel.MiscStatus = String.Format("Sync finished at at {0}, total time taken {1}",
DateTools.getNow().ToString(), (DateTools.getNow() - syncTime).ToString());
}
With databinding your Window will automatically updated as long as it notified that properties it bound to has been changed. So what you need is implement INotifyPropertyChanged in the viewmodel and raise property changed event whenever binding source property value changed. For example:
public class SyncViewModel : INotifyPropertyChanged
{
private string _miscStatus = "";
public string MiscStatus
{
get{ return _miscStatus; }
set
{
_miscStatus += value;
OnPropertyChanged("MiscStatus");
}
}
#region INotifyPropertyChanged implementation
public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged;
protected virtual void OnPropertyChanged(string propertyName)
{
PropertyChangedEventHandler handler = PropertyChanged;
if (handler != null) handler(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propertyName));
}
#endregion
}
In case somebody else comes across this issue in WPF, the solution described here is really simple and just worked fine for me. It uses an extension method to force an UIElement to be rendered:
public static class ExtensionMethods
{
private static Action EmptyDelegate = delegate() { };
public static void Refresh(this UIElement uiElement)
{
uiElement.Dispatcher.Invoke(DispatcherPriority.Render, EmptyDelegate);
}
}
Then, simply use as:
private void SomeLongOperation()
{
// long operations...
// UI update
label1.Content = someValue;
label1.Refresh();
// continue long operations
}
}
Quoting the original author:
The Refresh method is the extension method that takes any UI element and then calls that UIElement's Dispatcher's Invoke method. The trick is to call the Invoke method with DispatcherPriority of Render or lower. Since we don't want to do anything, I created an empty delegate. So how come this achieves refresh functionality?
When the DispatcherPriority is set to Render (or lower), the code will then execute all operations that are of that priority or higher. In the example, the code already sets label1.Content to something else, which will result in a render operation. So by calling Dispatcher.Invoke, the code essentially asks the system to execute all operations that are Render or higher priority, thus the control will then render itself (drawing the new content). Afterwards, it will then execute the provided delegate (which is our empty method).