Related
Setup:
Win10 .NET 4.7.1/VS2017 .NET 4.5/ C#
Level:
Beginner/Intermediate/new to threading
Objective:
1: A selenium web automation class that is triggered by a timer class so that the web automation class can exchange data with a javascript site at specific times.
2: Should be possible to migrate solution from WebForms to .NET library (dll).
Problem:
Step 1. Timer class sends time event to method in Web class to login to internet site = working.
Step 2. Web automation class (WinForms/GUI) tries to retrieve data from the method that is triggered by timer class event = Exception: "Calling thread cannot access this object because a different thread owns it." (as translated from swe).
I admit I´m confused by the terminology in the area of threading that is new to me. Also, I understand some multithreading techniques are only valid for WinForms. Since my objective is to migrate the solution to a dll these are not an option for me. I´ve played around with Invoke(), but as I understand it´s limited to use in WinForms. Guidance is highly appreciated!
WEB AUTOMATION CLASS:
private EdgeDriver driver;
private SeleniumHelper helper;
private WebAutomationTimer timer;
private double account;
public double Account { get => this.account; set => this.account = value; }
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
timer = new WebAutomationTimer(02, 36, 00, 02, 38, 00);
timer.OnLoginTime += Timer_OnLoginTime;
timer.OnLogoutTime += Timer_OnLogoutTime;
}
private void Timer_OnLoginTime()
{
Login();
}
private void Timer_OnLogoutTime()
{
Logout();
}
public bool Login()
{
try
{
// working login code
UpdateLabels();
}
catch (Exception e)
{
}
}
private void UpdateLabels()
{
// EXCEPTION !!!
lblAccount.Text = GetAccount();
// EXCEPTION !!!
}
TIMER CLASS:
class WebAutomationTimer
{
public event TimerEvent OnLoginTime;
public event TimerEvent OnLogoutTime;
//public event TimerEvent OnSecond;
private System.Timers.Timer timer;
private DateTime now;
private int loginHour;
private int loginMin;
private int loginSec;
private int logoutHour;
private int logoutMin;
private int logoutSec;
public WebAutomationTimer(int loginHour, int loginMin, int loginSec, int logoutHour, int logoutMin, int logoutSec)
{
timer = new System.Timers.Timer();
timer.Interval = 1000; // 1 sec
timer.Elapsed += Timer_Elapsed;
timer.Start();
this.loginHour = loginHour;
this.loginMin = loginMin;
this.loginSec = loginSec;
this.logoutHour = logoutHour;
this.logoutMin = logoutMin;
this.logoutSec = logoutSec;
}
// Each second event
private void Timer_Elapsed(object sender, System.Timers.ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
now = DateTime.Now;
//OnSecond();
//login
if (now.Hour == loginHour && now.Minute == loginMin && now.Second == loginSec)
OnLoginTime();
//logout
if (now.Hour == logoutHour && now.Minute == logoutMin && now.Second == logoutSec)
OnLogoutTime();
}
}
}
When you want to update View's control from another Thread it must show you error. Because it is using by UI Thread. In this case you have to use SynchronizationContext class or you can send Delegate to the App.Current.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(delegate must be here);
SynchronizationContext _context = SynchronizationContext.Current;
private void UpdateLabels()
{
_context.Post(x=>
{
lblAccount.Text = AccountBalance.ToString();
},null),
//...
}
Alternative of SynchronizationContext :
private void UpdateLabels()
{
var action = new Action(() =>
{
lblAccount.Text = AccountBalance.ToString();
});
App.Current.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(action);
//...
}
Both of them are same.
UI thread adapted for keyboard event and mouse event.
When you App.Current.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(delegate) you say to the UI Thread that
"execute this too".
In addition you can suppose UI Thread like this
while(!thisApplication.Ended)
{
wait for something to appear in message queue
Got something : what kind of this message?
Keyboard/Mouse message --> fire event handler
User BeginInvoke message --> execute delegate
User Invoke message --> execute delegate & post result
}
this error is beacuse of change lable text beacuse lable is in another thread you can use this code
lblAccount.Invoke(new EventHandler((s, ee) => { lblAccount.Text = AccountBalance.ToString(); }));
This solution is probably only valid in my case. OP can delete this question if it´s believed to be a duplicate.
The first objective with was an easy to develop/run/debug situation with a GUI. Setting properties causes no cross thread exception. Showing the properties in a MessageBox.Show() causes no exception either. Hence no cross thread issues to dodge in the development/GUI stage.
The second objective was to migrate to a dll, hence no need to interfere with a GUI thread.
/Thanks anyway
I have an application with a gui and a Rich Text Box where I output what the program is currently doing since data processing can be quite long.
I tried two approaches for that:
1 In the Backgroundworker method I can just call the following code fine:
GlobalVar.backgroundWorkerAppendText = task.Build_CSV_List();
Processchange();
Whereas I cannot use Form1.Processchange(); in the helper class due to the non static context
2 Therefore I tried to create my very first eventhandler.
The Idea was that helper.UpdateConsole() would raise an event
public event EventHandler OnConsoleUpdate;
public void Consoleupdate()
{
OnConsoleUpdate(this, EventArgs.Empty);
}
to which the Backgroundworker listens and then calls Processchange from its context
public void BackgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
StandardTasks task = new StandardTasks();
Helper helper = new Helper();
helper.OnConsoleUpdate += Processchange;
task.DoSomeStuffHere()
}
public void Processchange(object sender=null, EventArgs e=null)
{
//MessageBox.Show(GlobalVar.backgroundWorkerAppendText);
GlobalVar.next = false;
backgroundWorker1.ReportProgress(1);
while (GlobalVar.next == false)
{
helper.TimeBreaker(100,"ms");
}
}
Unfortunately this was was not successful. As soon as rising the Event I get the errormessage System.NullReferenceException which -after googling- leads me to the conclusion that there is no listerner attached to the event eventhouh I attached it in the Backgroundworker Do work.
Edit: the OnConsoleUpdate() == null as shown on the screenshot below
event = null
The helper is in another class file "helpers" which might be important for a solution.
i hope you guys can help me out.
Welcome to SO!
A few things immediately jump to mind.
First, let's get the event issue out of the way. You've got the correct approach - you need an event and method to call it, but that method should check if the event is null.
Basically, do this:
public event EventHandler OnConsoleUpdate;
public void ConsoleUpdate()
{
OnConsoleUpdate?.Invoke(this, EventArgs.Empty);
}
The above makes use of ?, a null-condition operator. You can read more about it on this MSDN page.
Second thing... it's unclear what your background worker actually IS. It sounds like it's some kind of custom class you crated? The reason it's important is because .NET actually has a BackgroundWorker class used for running operations... well, in the background. It also has an OnProgressChanged event which you can hook up to which could be used to update the UI (just remember to set the WorkerReportsProgress property to true). And to use the BackgroundWorker mentioned above, you shouldn't need to create any events of your own.
Here's how you can use the standard .NET BackgroundWorker:
System.ComponentModel.BackgroundWorker worker = new System.ComponentModel.BackgroundWorker();
void StartBackgroundTask()
{
worker.DoWork += worker_DoWork;
//if it's possible to display progress, use this
worker.WorkerReportsProgress = true;
worker.ProgressChanged += worker_ProgressChanged;
//what to do when the method finishes?
worker.RunWorkerCompleted += worker_RunWorkerCompleted;
//start!
worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
void worker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, System.ComponentModel.RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
//perform any "finalization" operations, like re-enable disabled buttons
//display the result using the data in e.Result
//this code will be running in the UI thread
}
//example of a container class to pass more data in the ReportProgress event
public class ProgressData
{
public string OperationDescription { get; set; }
public int CurrentResult { get; set; }
//feel free to add more stuff here
}
void worker_ProgressChanged(object sender, System.ComponentModel.ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
//display the progress using e.ProgressPercentage or e.UserState
//this code will be running in the UI thread
//UserState can be ANYTHING:
//var data = (ProgressData)e.UserState;
}
void worker_DoWork(object sender, System.ComponentModel.DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
//this code will NOT be running in the UI thread!
//you should NOT call the UI thread from this method
int result = 1;
//perform calculations
for (var i = 1; i <= 10; i++)
{
worker.ReportProgress(i, new ProgressData(){ OperationDescription = "CustomState passed as second, optional parameter", CurrentResult = result });
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5));
result *= i;
}
e.Result = result;
}
Now, the thing about the BackgroundWorker class is that it is rather old, and with current .NET versions you can use the async / await keywords to easily handle background operations and UI updates, but this probably is going outside the bounds of this question. That said, the existence of async / await doesn't invalidate the use of BackgroundWorker which is pretty simple in its usage.
There's one more worrisome thing in your code.
public void BackgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
StandardTasks task = new StandardTasks(); //<- you create a task
Helper helper = new Helper(); // <- you create a helper
helper.OnConsoleUpdate += Processchange; // <- you hook up to the helper event
task.DoSomeStuffHere(); // <- you do stuff with the task... but the task doesn't know about your helper above! Does `StandardTasks` use `Helper`? If so, how?
}
Do note that events, unless made static, aren't global. So hooking up to an event in one instance of a class won't cause another instance of that class to "fire" that event. It seems one way to fix your issues would be to make the StandardTasks class take Helper as one of the constructor parameters, so the code would look like this:
Helper helper = new Helper(); // <- you create a helper
helper.OnConsoleUpdate += Processchange; // <- you hook up to the helper class event to actually do something
StandardTasks task = new StandardTasks(helper); //<- you create a task which will use the helper with the hooked up event above
At the moment I am in the process of building a custom button handler (I needed to integrate the kinect into the button system which also used a mouse) then I got to a horrible thing called Event Handling.. at least an hour yelling at my pc :P. I was wondering, before I go and spend a while changing my system to allow for my new want, which is to have multiple events per handler, I was wondering, is the way I'm going to try work (I would just try, but I'm getting off for the night, so my hope is that I can save some time when I boot the computer up tomorrow and not attempt if my system isn't designed for it)
Also, ive seen a getInvoc list or somthing like that before when I was coding.. Would I add multiple delegates onto it then get that list and itterate over it?
On previous examples I had seen where people used:
public event EventHandler myEventHandler;
I had to use:
private Dictionary<BtnEvent, Delegate> m_events;
and then they did the following to add a handler (their way, not mine):
myObj.myEventHandler += delegate(object sender, EventArgs ea)
{
//do stuff on event
};
first.. If they ran this twice, once with funcA and second with funcb would it run both? or just one?
second, if I applied that logic of += to a Delegate would it work? (I had to use Delegate as I was storing the handlers inside of a dictionary, this allowed for logical access to handlers through use of an enum)
(my code)
private Dictionary<BtnEvent, Delegate> m_events;
//....
m_events = new Dictionary<BtnEvent, Delegate>(6);
m_events.Add(BtnEvent.CLICK_ENTER, null);
m_events.Add(BtnEvent.CLICK_LEAVE, null);
m_events.Add(BtnEvent.CLICK_STAY, null);
m_events.Add(BtnEvent.HOVER_ENTER, null);
m_events.Add(BtnEvent.HOVER_LEAVE, null);
m_events.Add(BtnEvent.HOVER_STAY, null);
//....
public bool addHandle(BtnEvent stateToGet, Delegate function)
{
bool success = false;
if(m_events.ContainsKey(stateToGet))
{
m_events[stateToGet] = function;
}
return(success);
}
// CHANGE ABOVE TO:
public bool addHandle(BtnEvent stateToGet, Delegate function)
{
bool success = false;
if(m_events.ContainsKey(stateToGet))
{
m_events[stateToGet] += function;
}
return(success);
}
Will changing m_events[stateToGet] = function; to m_events[stateToGet] += function; allow me to have multiple event handles (functions I passed to addHandle) be called through the following code?
private void ExecuteEvent(BtnEvent currEvent)
{
if(m_events.ContainsKey(currEvent))
{
if(m_events[currEvent] != null)
{
m_events[currEvent].DynamicInvoke(null);
}
}
}
Please see below code which answers your first question:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
this.Load += new EventHandler(Form1_Load);
}
void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
funcA();
funcB();
}
private void funcA()
{
button1.Click += new EventHandler(button1_Click);
}
private void funcB()
{
button1.Click += new EventHandler(button1_Click);
}
void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
MessageBox.Show("I am in event handler");
}
}
On clicking the Button, "I am in event handler" message is shown twice which means += operator works in similar way with delegates as it works with integers or strings. It simply adds the function handler to the queue and upon execution of events, calls all the function pointers in queue.
Regarding your second question, I think you wont achieve the expected behavior by changing = to +=. What I understand from your statement is that, you wish to execute multiple events handlers like CLICK_ENTER, CLICK_LEAVE on calling ExecuteEvent() function. However, since you are storing event handlers and their delegates in a Dictionary, changing = to += will only work in the same way as illustrated in above code.
I have create a backgroundworker in an class it works, but if i call and wait until the end run, call it for the second time it will do the same process twice
i thinks there is somthing wrong with bw.DoWork +=
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
nptest.test.start("null", "null");
}
namespace nptest
{
class test
{
public static void start(string str, string strb)
{
if (bw.IsBusy != true)
{
bw.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
bw.DoWork += (obj, e) => bw_DoWork(str, strb);
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(bw_RunWorkerCompleted);
bw.RunWorkerAsync();
}
}
private static BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
private static void bw_DoWork(string str, string strb)
{
System.Windows.Forms.MessageBox.Show("initializing BackgroundWorker");
}
private static void bw_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if ((e.Cancelled == true))
{
Console.WriteLine("Canceled");
}
else if (!(e.Error == null))
{
Console.WriteLine("Error: " + e.Error.Message);
}
bw.Dispose();
}
}
}
problem solved
class test
{
private static List<object> arguments = new List<object>();
// initializing with program startup
public static void bwinitializing()
{
bw.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
bw.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(bw_DoWork);
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(bw_RunWorkerCompleted);
}
public static void start(string str, string strb)
{
if (bw.IsBusy != true)
{
arguments.Clear();
arguments.Add(str);
arguments.Add(strb);
bw.RunWorkerAsync(arguments);
}
}
private static BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
private static void bw_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
List<object> genericlist = e.Argument as List<object>;
System.Windows.Forms.MessageBox.Show("BackgroundWorker " + genericlist[0]);
}
I would suspect that multiple DoWork events are being inadvertently added.
That is, every time the start method is called it registers a new DoWork event handler. This adds and does not replace the existing handler DoWork handler. So then there will be multiple DoWork handlers called subsequent times .. 1, 2, 3, etc.
// creates a NEW delegate and adds a NEW handler
bw.DoWork += (obj, e) => bw_DoWork(str, strb);
I would recommend not using a closure here, but rather just use a Method Group (with implicit conversion to a delegate) and then pass the data to the RunWorkerAsync call (there is a form that takes an argument for data).
The RunWorkerCompleted += line doesn't have this issue because it is passed a delegate from a Method Group (which is guaranteed to always evaluate to the same delegate object1). Thus the repeated += calls for that line will replace the handler.
Example:
class MyData {
public string StrA { get; set; }
}
// These only need to be setup once (and should be for clarity).
// However it will be "ok" now if they are called multiple times
// as, since the delegates are the same, the += will
// act as a replacement (as it replaces the previous delegate with itself).
bw.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
bw.DoWork += bw_DoWork;
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += bw_RunWorkerCompleted;
// Pass data via argument
bw.RunWorkerAsync(new MyData {
StrA = str,
});
void bw_DoWork (object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e) {
var data = (MyData)e.Argument;
var str = data.StrA;
// stuff
}
1 I am not sure if it is guaranteed to be reference-equals equality, but using this approach allows for stable invoking of += and -= from the delegate from the Method Group even if obtained by new DelegateType(MethodGroup).
Wrt. my comment in the main post: if UI elements are accessed from a thread on which they were not created then there will fun "Cross-thread operation exceptions". I believe this usage of a Message Box is "okay" (when not created with an owner from another thread), but the practice of accessing the UI in a BackgroundWorker's DoWork is generally dubious.
Also, do not call bw.Dispose() here; dispose it with the owning container or context. It appears to be nice and benign in this case, but only do it when that BGW instance will never be used again. Calling it from an event handler is also dubious as the BGW is still "active".
I have encounter same problem as above commenter "Power-Mosfet"
and in the end, added a new BackgroundWorker() then assigned to the global bw value will fix my problem.
code is, change from:
private BackgroundWorker gBgwDownload;
private void yourFunction_bw(xxx)
{
// Create a background thread
gBgwDownload.DoWork += bgwDownload_DoWork;
gBgwDownload.RunWorkerCompleted += bgwDownload_RunWorkerCompleted;
//omited some code
gBgwDownload.RunWorkerAsync(paraObj);
}
to:
private BackgroundWorker gBgwDownload;
private void yourFunction_bw(xxx)
{
// Create a background thread
gBgwDownload = new BackgroundWorker(); /* added this line will fix problem */
gBgwDownload.DoWork += bgwDownload_DoWork;
gBgwDownload.RunWorkerCompleted += bgwDownload_RunWorkerCompleted;
//omited some code
gBgwDownload.RunWorkerAsync(paraObj);
}
There is also another reason. look for DoWorkEventHandler in its generated code InitializeComponent() If you have generated it through compnent UI properties and also registering it yourself.
Because if you register it again it will not override the previous one but will add another event and will call twice.
In my case, BackgroundWorker was running twice because in the constructor class of my form I declared the DoWork, ProgressChanged and RunWorkerCompleted event handlers, but it was already declared by Visual Studio 2013 in Designer part of this form class.
So, I just deleted my declarations and it worked fine.
thank you....this code is working fine... creating new intance for backroundworker is good idea....
Now we can call this function in for/while loop and can run multiple backgroundworker process.
I coded like this
when button click is done.. without distrubting the main thread flow... multiple process will be running back side....
i just used messagebox to pop up..but we can do timetaking process to run in "bgwDownload_DoWork" function... and multiple process will be created... and her we need not check the BackgroundWorker is busy or not...
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
yourFunction_bw(i);
}
private BackgroundWorker gBgwDownload;
private void yourFunction_bw(int i)
{
// Create a background thread
gBgwDownload = new BackgroundWorker(); // added this line will fix problem
gBgwDownload.DoWork += bgwDownload_DoWork;
gBgwDownload.RunWorkerAsync(i);
}
private void bgwDownload_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
int stre = (int)e.Argument;
MessageBox.Show(stre.ToString ()); // time taken process can be added here
}
I ran into this problem today, I put a background worker on a popup form that was doing a long running task when I noticed that every time I showed the form the background worker RunWorkerCompleted event was being called multiple times.
My problem was that I was not disposing of the form after closing it, which meant every time I showed the form it added another handler to the even each time.
Disposing of the form when finished with it solved my problem. Just wanted to mention it here as I came across this page when I went looking for a solution for my situation.
I removed the control from the designer and instantiate a new WorkerProcess in Code:
example:
var bwProcess = new BackgroundWorker();
bwProcess.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(bwProcess_DoWork);
bwProcess.RunWorkerCompleted += bwProcess_RunWorkerCompleted;
I have a c# application that uses a background worker thread, and quite successfully updates the UI from the running thread. The application involves shortest path routing on a network, and I display the network and the shortest path, on the UI, as the background worker proceeds. I would like to allow the user to slow down the display through use of a slider, while the application is running.
I found this as a suggestion, but it is in vb.net, I am not clear on how to get it to work in c#.
How can the BackgroundWorker get values from the UI thread while it is running?
I can pass the value of the slider to the backgroundworker as follows:
// Start the asynchronous operation.
delay = this.trackBar1.Value;
backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerAsync(delay);
and use it within the backgroundworker thread, but it only uses the initially-sent value. I am not clear on how to pick up the value from inside the backgroundworker when I move the slider on the UI.
I have previously used multiple threads and delegates, but if it is possible to utilize the background worker, I would prefer it for its simplicity.
5/10/2012
Thanks to all for your responses. I am still having problems, most likely because of how I have structured things. The heavy duty calculations for network routing are done in the TransportationDelayModel class. BackgroundWorker_DoWork creates an instance of this class, and then kicks it off. The delay is handled in TransportationDelayModel.
The skeleton of code is as follows:
In UI:
private void runToolStripMenuItem1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (sqliteFileName.Equals("Not Set"))
{
MessageBox.Show("Database Name Not Set");
this.chooseDatabaseToolStripMenuItem_Click(sender, e);
}
if (backgroundWorker1.IsBusy != true)
{
// Start the asynchronous operation.
delay = this.trackBar1.Value;
// pass the initial value of delay
backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerAsync(delay);
// preclude multiple runs
runToolStripMenuItem1.Enabled = false;
toolStripButton2.Enabled = false;
}
}
private void backgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker worker = sender as BackgroundWorker;
if (!backgroundWorkerLaunched)
{
// instantiate the object that does all the heavy work
TransportationDelayModel TDM = new TransportationDelayModel(worker, e);
// kick it off
TDM.Run(sqliteFileName, worker, e);
backgroundWorkerLaunched = true;
}
}
The TransportationDelayModel constructor is:
public TransportationDelayModel(BackgroundWorker worker, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
listCentroids = new List<RoadNode>();
listCentroidIDs = new List<int>();
listNodes = new List<RoadNode>();
listNodeIDs = new List<int>();
listRoadLink = new List<RoadLink>();
roadGraph = new AdjacencyGraph<int, RoadLink>(true); // note parallel edges allowed
tdmWorker = worker;
tdmEvent = e;
networkForm = new NetworkForm();
}
so I have the tdmWorker, which allows me to pass information back to the UI.
In the internal calculations in TransportationDelayModel, I sleep for the delay period
if (delay2 > 0)
{
tdmWorker.ReportProgress(-12, zzz);
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(delay2);
}
so the problem seems to be how to pass an updated slider value from the UI back to the object that is executing in the background worker. I have tried a number of combinations, sort of thrashing around, to no avail, either nothing happens or I get a message about not being allowed to access what is happening on the other thread. I realize that if I were doing all the work in the DoWork event handler, then I should be able to do things as you suggest, but there is too much complexity for that to happen.
Again, thank you for your suggestions and help.
6/2/2012
I have resolved this problem by two methods, but I have some questions. Per my comment to R. Harvey, I have built a simple application. It consists of a form with a run button, a slider, and a rich text box. The run button launches a background worker thread that instantiates an object of class "Model" that does all the work (a simplified surrogate for my TransportationModel). The Model class simply writes 100 lines to the text box, incrementing the number of dots in each line by 1, with a delay between each line based on the setting of the slider, and the slider value at the end of the line, something like this:
....................58
.....................58
......................58
.......................51
........................44
.........................44
The objective of this exercise is to be able to move the slider on the form while the "Model" is running, and get the delay to change (as in above).
My first solution involves the creation of a Globals class, to hold the value of the slider:
class Globals
{
public static int globalDelay;
}
then, in the form, I update this value whenever the trackbar is scrolled:
private void trackBar1_Scroll(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Globals.globalDelay = this.trackBar1.Value;
}
and in the Model, I just pick up the value of the global:
public void Run(BackgroundWorker worker, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
for (int i = 1; i < 100; i++)
{
delay = Globals.globalDelay; // revise delay based on static global set on UI
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(delay);
worker.ReportProgress(i);
string reportString = ".";
for (int k = 0; k < i; k++)
{
reportString += ".";
}
reportString += delay.ToString();
worker.ReportProgress(-1, reportString);
}
}
}
This works just fine.
My question: are there any drawbacks to this approach, which seems very simple to implement and quite general.
The second approach, based on suggestions by R. Harvey, makes use of delegates and invoke.
I create a class for delegates:
public class MyDelegates
{
public delegate int DelegateCheckTrackBarValue(); // create the delegate here
}
in the form, I create:
public int CheckTrackBarValue()
{
return this.trackBar1.Value;
}
and the Model class now has a member m_CheckTrackBarValue
public class Model
{
#region Members
Form1 passedForm;
public static MyDelegates.DelegateCheckTrackBarValue m_CheckTrackBarValue=null;
#endregion Members
#region Constructor
public Model(BackgroundWorker worker, DoWorkEventArgs e, Form1 form)
{
passedForm = form;
}
When the background thread is launched by the run button, the calling form is passed
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (backgroundWorker1.IsBusy != true)
{
backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerAsync();
}
}
private void backgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker worker = sender as BackgroundWorker;
if (!backgroundWorkerLaunched)
{
// instantiate the object that does all the heavy work
Model myModel= new Model(worker, e, this);
Model.m_CheckTrackBarValue = new MyDelegates.DelegateCheckTrackBarValue(this.CheckTrackBarValue);
// kick it off
myModel.Run(worker, e);
backgroundWorkerLaunched = true;
}
}
Finally, in the Model, the Invoke method is called on the passed form to get the value of the trackbar.
public void Run(BackgroundWorker worker, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
for (int i = 1; i < 100; i++)
{
int delay = (int)passedForm.Invoke(m_CheckTrackBarValue,null); // invoke the method, note need the cast here
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(delay);
worker.ReportProgress(i);
string reportString = ".";
for (int k = 0; k < i; k++)
{
reportString += ".";
}
reportString += delay.ToString();
worker.ReportProgress(-1, reportString);
}
}
This works as well. I kept getting an error until I made the member variable static, e.g.
public static MyDelegates.DelegateCheckTrackBarValue m_CheckTrackBarValue=null;
My questions on this solution: Are there advantages to this solution as regards to the previous version? Am I making things too complicated in the way I have implemented this? Why does m_CheckTrackBarValue need to be static.
I apologize for the length of this edit, but I thought that the problem and solutions might be of interest to others.
You have to pass the TrackBar object to the BackgroundWorker, not delay. delay doesn't change once you set it.
To simplify the needed Invoke(), you can use a helper method, such as this one:
Async.UI(delegate { textBox1.Text = "This is way easier!"; }, textBox1, true);
I will assume that you are already familiarized with cross-thread invocation to update the UI. So, the solution is very simple: in your worker thread, after each iteration, invoke the UI to get the slider thumb position.
To use a backgroundworker, you add a method to the DoWork property, like this:
this.backgroundWorker1.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
this.backgroundWorker1.DoWork += new System.ComponentModel.DoWorkEventHandler(this.backgroundWorker1_DoWork);
this.backgroundWorker1.RunWorkerCompleted += new System.ComponentModel.RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(this.backgroundWorker1_RunWorkerCompleted);
In the DoWork method, you need to check the variable where the updated delay is set.
This could be an integer field that is available on the containing Form or UI control, or it could be the TrackBar itself.