We Keep Coding

Need to implement "Scan" method in dll (non blocking)

Sorry for the title, i didn't find it easy to resume.
My issue is that I need to implement a c# dll that implements a 'scan' method, but this scan, when invoked, must not block the main thread of the application using the dll. Moreover, it is a duty that after the scan resolves it rises an Event.
So my issue (in the deep) is that i'm not so experienced at c#, and after very hard investigation i've come up with some solutions but i'm not very sure if they are the "right" procedures.
In the dll i've come up with:
public class Reader
{
public delegate void ReaderEventHandler(Object sender, AlertEventArgs e);
public void Scan(String ReaderName)
{
AlertEventArgs alertEventArgs = new AlertEventArgs();
alertEventArgs.uuiData = null;
//Code with blocking scan function here
if (ScanFinnished)
{
alertEventArgs.uuiData = "Scan Finnished!";
}
alertEventArgs.cardStateData = readerState[0].eventState;
ReaderEvent(new object(), alertEventArgs);
}
public event ReaderEventHandler ReaderEvent;
}
public class AlertEventArgs : EventArgs
{
#region AlertEventArgs Properties
private string _uui = null;
private uint cardState = 0;
#endregion
#region Get/Set Properties
public string uuiData
{
get { return _uui; }
set { _uui = value; }
}
public uint cardStateData
{
get { return cardState; }
set { cardState = value; }
}
#endregion
}
While in the main app I do:
Reader reader;
Task polling;
String SelectedReader = "Some_Reader";
private void bButton_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
reader = new Reader();
reader.ReaderEvent += new Reader.ReaderEventHandler(reader_EventChanged);
polling = Task.Factory.StartNew(() => reader.Scan(SelectedReader));
}
void reader_EventChanged(object sender, AlertEventArgs e)
{
MessageBox.Show(e.uuiData + " Estado: " + e.cardStateData.ToString("X"));
reader.Dispose();
}
So here, it works fine but i don't know if it's the proper way, in addition i'm not able to handle possible Exceptions generated in the dll.
Also tried to use async/await but found it difficult and as I understand it's just a simpler workaround Tasks.
What are the inconvinients of this solution? how can i capture Exceptions (are they in other threads and that's why i cant try/catch them)? Possible concept faults?

When your class sends events, the sender usually is that class, this. Having new object() as sender makes absolutely no sense. Even null would be better but... just use this.
You shouldn't directly raise events as it might result in race conditions. Might not happen easily in your case but it's just a good guideline to follow. So instead of calling ReaderEvent(new object(), alertEventArgs); call RaiseReaderEvent(alertEventArgs); and create method for it.
For example:
private void RaiseReaderEvent(AlertEventArgs args)
{
var myEvent = ReaderEvent; // This prevents race conditions
if (myEvent != null) // remember to check that someone actually subscribes your event
myEvent(this, args); // Sender should be *this*, not some "new object()".
}
Though I personally like a bit more generic approach:
private void Raise<T>(EventHandler<T> oEvent, T args) where T : EventArgs
{
var eventInstance = oEvent;
if (eventInstance != null)
eventInstance(this, args);
}
Which can then be used to raise all events in same class like this:
Raise(ReaderEvent, alertEventArgs);
Since your scan should be non-blocking, you could use tasks, async/await or threads for example. You have chosen Tasks which is perfectly fine.
In every case you must understand that when you are not blocking your application, your application's main thread continues going like a train. Once you jump out of that train, you can't return. You probably should declare a new event "ErrorEvent" that is raised if your scan-procedure catches an exception. Your main application can then subscribe to that event as well, but you still must realize that those events are not (necessarily) coming from the main thread. When not, you won't be able to interact with your GUI directly (I'm assuming you have one due to button click handler). If you are using WinForms, you'll have to invoke all GUI changes when required.
So your UI-thread safe event handler should be something like this:
void reader_EventChanged(object sender, AlertEventArgs e)
{
if (InvokeRequired) // This true for others than UI Thread.
{
Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate
{
Text = "My new title!";
});
}
else
Text = "My new title!";
}
In WPF there's Dispather that handles similar invoking.

Check if event (doubleClick) is running

I am writing a tool which switchs between a lot of states. For some events I need to be sure they wont get executed a second time while the called function (inside the event) is running. This is how I managed it before:
// Global variables //
public bool func1IsRunning = false;
public bool func2IsRunning = false;
...
public void listView_DoubleClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if(!func1IsRunning)
{
func1();
func1IsRunning = false;
}
}
public void func1()
{
func1IsRunning = true;
// some code in here //
}
But with every extension of my tool the list of the global variables grows up. Also the events and functions getting less clear to read.
Isnt there a way like this(?):
public void listView_DoubleClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if(DoubleClick.IsHandled)
{
func1();
}
}
public void func1()
{
// some code in here //
// ................. //
DoubleClick.IsHandled = true; // at the end of the function //
}
So what I am looking for is a way to determine if an event is still running or not. My code is working, im just unhappy with how it looks like.
Any ideas?
UPDATE 1
I decided to use Steve's answer as it solves my problem by the clearest way.
Anyway it is NOT running correctly for now.
Here is how my code looks like:
public void listView_DoubleClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
try
{
listView.DoubleClick -= new EventHandler(listView_DoubleClick);
itemEdit();
}
finally
{
listView.DoubleClick += new EventHandler(listView_DoubleClick);
}
}
The code above is NOT disabling the handler.
public void listView_DoubleClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
try
{
listView.DoubleClick -= listView_DoubleClick;
itemEdit();
}
finally
{
listView.DoubleClick += listView_DoubleClick;
}
}
This code is also not disabling the handler.
This is the line where the handler gets enabled (MainForm.Designer.cs):
this.listView.DoubleClick += new System.EventHandler(this.listView_DoubleClick);
There are no errors raised. The event just gets fired again and again. Where is the problem?
UPDATE 2:
As Sinatr asked in the comments below if my function is really waiting or just enabling user input he discovered where the mistake was made.
Steve's answer is correct according to my wrong written question. Thanks a lot to all of you guys.

Just disable the event handler
public void listView_DoubleClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
try
{
listView.DoubleClick -= listView_DoubleClick;
// Now, even if func1 causes a DoubleClick event,
// or user manages to trigger a DobuleClick
// there is no event registered and this code could
// reentered until you exit from func1.
func1();
}
finally
{
// Important part. the finally block is required
// because you should readd the event handler
// ALSO in case an exception occurs in func1
// and it is not handled there
listView.DoubleClick += listView_DoubleClick;
}
}
EDIT
Looking at your comment I suspect that this DoubleClick event is assigned to more than one control. If this is the case, using the global listView global instance of a listview doesn't disable the double click on other controls that are linked to the same code.
If this is the case then you need a more generic approach
public void listView_DoubleClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Control c = sender as Control;
try
{
if(c != null)
{
c.DoubleClick -= listView_DoubleClick;
// Now, even if func1 causes a DoubleClick event,
// or user manages to trigger a DobuleClick
// there is no event registered and this code could
// reentered until you exit from func1.
func1();
}
}
finally
{
// Important part. the finally block is required
// because you should readd the event handler
// ALSO in case an exception occurs in func1
// and it is not handled there
if(c != null) c.DoubleClick += listView_DoubleClick;
}
}
Of course, this is just to enable/disable DoubleClicks events, it cannot works if you assign this event handler to other standard events like Click that have the same signature (object sender, EventArgs e)

How about something like the following using locks:
private object globalLock = new object();
private Dictionary<int, object> lockObjects = new Dictionary<int, object>();
public void listView_DoubleClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
object lockObject;
lock (globalLock) // to avoid two threads creating the object
{
if (!lockObjects.ContainsKey(1))
lockObjects.Add(1, new object());
lockObject = lockObjects[1];
}
if (Monitor.TryEnter(lockObject) // enter only if no thread has already entered
{
try { func1(); }
finally { Monitor.Exit(lockObject); }
}
}
This is different to Steve's logic in the matter that it is thread-safe.

A simple state-machine should solve your problem without requiring too many variables. Create an Enum named AppState like this:
enum AppState
{
Ready = 1,
InsideListView1Click = 2,
InsideListView1DoubleClick = 3
InsideListView2Click = 4,
InsideListView2DoubleClick = 5
}
This enum could grow as you add new controls and/or event-handlers to your application. Now use a single global variable that keeps track of the application state and modify it inside event-handlers appropriately:
private AppState m_State = AppState.Ready;
And in the event-handlers you would do:
private void ListView1_DoubleClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
lock
{
if(m_State != AppState.Ready)
return;
else
m_State = AppState.InsideListView1DoubleClick;
}
//Do your stuff
m_State = AppState.Ready;
}
This way newer calls will be ignored instead of being queued. If you expect to be in multiple states at the same time, you could apply [Flags] attribute on this enum as well. Also note that enums are thread-safe and evaluating them is atomic, so multi-threading shouldn't be a problem either.

Frame.Navigate in LoadState

I'm having trouble trying to navigate automatically between pages in my Windows 8.1 app based on a little check. It just doesn't want to navigate to another page when doing this in LoadState, as if something isn't loaded yet, but it doesn't give an error either. When I insert a delay using (for example) await Task.Delay(2000) before doing Frame.Navigate, then my app will redirect without any problem.
protected async override void LoadState(Object navigationParameter, Dictionary<String, Object> pageState)
{
MyData oData = await getData();
if (oData != null)
{
this.Frame.Navigate(typeof(newPage), oData);
}
else
{
// do something else
}
}
Do I have to put this code in another load- or navigated-event? Or how can I make this work?

In LoadState and SaveState you should only save and restore the page state (called when suspending and reactivating the app). Do nothing else (like navigating).
Put your logic into the OnNavigatedTo method instead...

If you want to navigate from method that called when page is loads, you should place your navigation code to OnNavigatedTo(...). But do not forget to wrap your code in Dispatcher.RunAsync(...) - Frame navigation in xaml return false

I tried calling Frame.Navigate(...) from the OnNavigatedTo method but still the navigation didn't occur.
There are other answers which say use Dispatcher.RunAsync, but that feels like it's making assumptions about the threading model of Windows Phone.
Here's what I do: attach a handler to the Loaded event of the page instead, and put my "redirect" logic in there. Loaded fires after OnNavigateTo and after NavigationHelper_LoadState, but before the page has become visible.
public LaunchPadPage() {
this.InitializeComponent();
this.navigationHelper = new NavigationHelper(this);
this.navigationHelper.LoadState += this.NavigationHelper_LoadState;
this.navigationHelper.SaveState += this.NavigationHelper_SaveState;
this.Loaded += LaunchPadPage_Loaded;
this.app = (App)App.Current;
}
private void NavigationHelper_LoadState(object sender, LoadStateEventArgs e) {
// Let's show the root zone items
// NB: In case we don't have this data yet, do nothing
if (app.Hierarchy != null)
{
DefaultViewModel["Items"] = app.Hierarchy.RootItems;
}
}
private void LaunchPadPage_Loaded(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) {
// No data? Go to the downloads page instead.
if (app.Hierarchy == null)
{
Frame.Navigate(typeof(DownloadingPage));
}
}

Refactoring big ball of mud; not sure static is being used properly here. Advice?

I'll admit sometimes the deeper nuances of the keyword static escape me.
Here's what I'm seeing:
public partial class Default : CSSDEIStatusBase
{
private static Default _csWitWeb;
protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
//DoStuff
_csWitWeb = this;
//OtherStuff
}
public static void ForceLoadSyncOperation(int? index)
{
Default._csWitWeb.LoadSelectedSyncOperation(index);
}
}
The only references to ForceLoadSyncOperation are:
Default.ForceLoadSyncOperation(index);
or
Default.ForceLoadSyncOperation(null);
Both of these calls originate from:
public partial class DataOriginUserControl : System.Web.UI.UserControl
and are not located inside of static methods.
E.G:
protected void btnCancelSyncOperation_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
this.lblErrorMessage.Text = string.Empty;
this.lblErrorMessage.Visible = false;
int index = _syncOperation.Sequence - 1;
Default.ForceLoadSyncOperation(index);
}
This all seems really quirky to me. Does this smell to anyone else? Not really sure how to untangle it, though, as I can't exactly create an instance of the Default page inside of a user control.
Thoughts? Thanks for reading.
protected void LoadSelectedSyncOperation(int? index)
{
SyncOperationConfiguration[] syncOperations = CSServiceClient.GetInterfaceConfiguration().SyncOperationConfigurations.ToArray();
PopulateSyncOperationsListView(syncOperations);
SyncOperationConfiguration syncOperation = null;
try
{
syncOperation = syncOperations[index.HasValue ? index.Value : 0];
}
catch
{
syncOperation = syncOperations[0];
}
ucDataOrigin.LoadSyncOperationData(syncOperation);
Session["ConfigMenuActiveIndex"] = 1;
menuConfiguration.Items[(int)Session["ConfigMenuActiveIndex"]].Selected = true;
mvwConfiguration.ActiveViewIndex = (int)Session["ConfigMenuActiveIndex"];
}

Presumably, the user control is contained within the Default page and the static member is being used as a shortcut to get the current instance of Default. I would've done it this way:
Default defaultPage = this.Page as Default;
if (defaultPage != null)
{
defaultPage.LoadSelectedSyncOperation(index);
}
Using a static member in this way is not safe. It opens up the door for race conditions. There is the potential risk that the user control is loaded in another page and calls LoadSelectedSyncOperation() on a separate request's instance of Default, thus wreaking all kinds of potential havoc.

I don't know what LoadSelectedSyncOperation does but this code looks weird. Whenever you click btnCancelSyncOperation you end up calling this method on some page, but you never know on which of them. It doesn't make much sense to me.

I would definitely say your concerns are valid. I can't think of any reason that this design would make sense, ever. This would throw a flag for me, too.
Based on your reply to my comment, if the Default.LoadSelectedSyncOperation is not dependent upon the Default page somehow, then I suggest it be refactored into a separate class (not an ASP.NET Page).
Whether it makes sense for the method or new class to be static or not is a separate concern and would be based on the logic contained within the method.

C# - Concurrent I/O operations exception

I have a refresh button to update news in my WP7 application. When I double or triple click on the refresh button I am getting an error
"WebClient does not support concurrent I/O operations" .
I think thats because It is sending the request triple times and making it crash. Here is my Click code.
private void NewsRefresh_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
var vm = this.DataContext as MainPageViewModel;
if (vm != null)
{
vm.UpdateNews();
}
}
How can I turn it as "if It is busy cancel the process".

WebClient isn't very flexible but if you really want to use it you can make use of the IsBusy property and then cancel ongoing operation. Then, once it's cancelled you can restart it. There is important problem with synchronization. The operation which consists of checking IsBusy and invoking CancelAsync isn't atomic. Luckily DownloadStringCompleted is dispatched to the UI thread so you don't need to bother about synchronization. The snippet below shows how can you achieve it. For simplicity it's Windows Forms.
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
WebClient _WebClient;
bool _UpdateNews;
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
_WebClient = new WebClient();
_WebClient.DownloadStringCompleted += new DownloadStringCompletedEventHandler(_WebClient_DownloadStringCompleted);
_UpdateNews = false;
}
void _WebClient_DownloadStringCompleted(object sender, DownloadStringCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if (_UpdateNews)
{
_UpdateNews = false;
UpdateNews();
}
else if (e.Error != null)
{
// Report error
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show(e.Result);
}
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (_WebClient.IsBusy)
{
_WebClient.CancelAsync();
_UpdateNews = true;
}
else
{
UpdateNews();
}
}
private void UpdateNews()
{
_WebClient.DownloadStringAsync(new Uri("http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7084948/c-concurrent-i-o-operations-exception"));
}
}

The 'easy' way (though not bullet proof):
private void NewsRefresh_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
try
{
NewsRefresh.Enabled = false;
var vm = this.DataContext as MainPageViewModel;
if (vm != null)
{
vm.UpdateNews();
}
}
finally
{
NewsRefresh.Enabled = true;
}
}
The more difficult approach would require more details on what exactly a MainPageViewModel is, and what UpdateNews() does. Basically you need to store a state value wherever you are storing the WebClient instance. Before using the WebClient you need check to see if you are already using it. The issue comes when multiple threads may operate on a single instance, or if you multiple operations (other than UpdateNews). When multiple threads are involved the easiest thing is to surround the usage of the WebClient with a Mutex.
Of course the other option is to not reuse the WebClient instance, rather create a new one for each new request.
UPDATE
Well, well, using DownloadStringAsync is certainly going to make things fun. The above code Disabling the UI will not work unless you move the re-enabling code. It would be easiest to go with my last suggestion and just create a new instance of WebClient. I'm not real fond of WebClient myself and prefer using WebRequest.Create.