We Keep Coding

How to stop my Thread in a function from a other function?

I need to stop a Thread when my timer is done.
But this all from a other function.
My Timer starts after Pressing Key: L. a Messagebox appears "Timer started" and my Thread starts too.
after 10 seconds, Timer stops with message but my Thread is still running.
What can i do? :/
void StartFunction()
{
Thread AB = new Thread(SEARCHING) { IsBackground = true };
AB.Start();
}
void StopFunction()
{
Thread AB = new Thread(SEARCHING);
AB.Abort();
}
private void Form1_KeyDown(object sender, KeyEventArgs e)
{
if (e.KeyCode == Keys.L)
{
StartFunction();
timer1.Start();
MessageBox.Show("Timer 1 started!");
}
}
int time = 0;
private void timer1_Tick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
time++;
if (time == 10 && timer1.Enabled)
{
StopFunction();
MessageBox.Show("Timer 1 stoped!");
timer1.Stop();
time = 0;
}
}

Idle_Mind is correct on how to accomplish this. Below is a working example using .NET 6.
One important detail is to use Thread.Join(). This will tell your caller to block until the loop is exited and the method returns.
Here I use the command console to key off the switching of the _running flag. You can do the same with a timer or whatever else. Keep in mind that you should probably also implement IDisposable in your class with the thread in it and set _running to false and do the join there as well. That way, you can instantiate the object with using.
namespace Lala
{
class AB : IDisposable
{
private bool _running = false;
private readonly Thread _thread;
public AB() => _thread = new Thread(Method);
private void Method()
{
while (_running)
{
Console.WriteLine("doing stuff");
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
}
public void StartMethod()
{
_running = true;
_thread.Start();
}
public void StopMethod()
{
_running = false;
_thread.Join();
}
public void Dispose() => StopMethod();
}
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
Console.WriteLine("Launching a Thread. Press any key to stop it");
using AB ab = new();
// AB ab = new(); // if using is not appropriate
ab.StartMethod();
while (!Console.KeyAvailable)
Thread.Sleep(10);
// ab.StopMethod();// if using is not appropriate
}
}
}

Using modern methods you would write something like
private async void Form1_KeyDown(object sender, KeyEventArgs e)
{
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource(10000);
var task = Task.Run(() => Search(cts.Token));
try
{
var result = await task;
// handle result
}
catch (OperationCanceledException)
{
// handle cancelled
}
catch (Exception)
{
// handle other exceptions
}
}
public int Search(CancellationToken cancel)
{
while (true)
{
cancel.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
// Do searching
if (found)
return result;
}
}
This would use thread pool threads instead of dedicated threads, and avoids the need to manually managing a timer. It also makes it easy to handle the result from the operation, if there are any.

Unfortunately, everything posted before didn't work for me or i just had not understand what i have to do.
Iam a C# Novice and I have a hard time understanding technical terms.
But i found a solution to make this possible.
This stops not the Thread but it Stops the while there has a function in a Thread.
First set a bool on top under public partial class:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
private volatile bool m_StopThread;
then you have to give your while in the function this:
while (!m_StopThread)
this means that your while is still not running until this is set true.
After this is set, you give your Button or Timer a function maybe like this:
if ()
{
m_StopThread = true;
}
If this function is active your Thread will Start, because now its true and not longer false.
at the same way you can stop this again by set this function to false again.
If the solution I'm explaining has already been suggested, I thank you.
And hope it helps others.
But unfortunately I couldn't understand how to proceed now.
Thank you to those who go out of their way to help people like me every day. :)

How to suspend a thread by another thread in C#?

Sorry for my bad English. Hope someone suggests me a better version of my question.
I've searched but seemed like I couldn't find the answer for my problem.
Currently, I'm writing a C# WPF app. This app will perform a heavy task in a long time. So I've decided to create another class with that heavy method and pass that method to another thread. I have to create a class to do that because the heavy method takes parameters.
I want the ability to suspend and resume that thread. I've known that I should use a ManualResetEvent object or Thread.Sleep method.
After many hours of trying and testing, getting confused why I always end up suspend the UI thread but the heavy thread is still running. What I've tried were:
Create a ManualResetEvent object called mre inside the HeavyClass. When user click the Pause button, the UI class will call the method heavyClass.mre.WaitOne().
class HeavyClass
{
// properties
ManualResetEvent mre = new ManualResetEvent(false);
public void HeavyRun()
{
//Do something takes really long time
//And doesn't have any loops
}
}
class MainWindow : Window
{
// properties
private HeavyClass heavyClass = new HeavyClass();
private void buttonStart_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
Thread t = new Thread(heavyClass.HeavyRun);
t.Start();
}
private void buttonPause_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
heavyClass.mre.WaitOne();
}
}
Create a method called SleepThread inside the HeavyClass. When user click the Pause button, the UI class will call the method heavyClass.SleepThread().
class HeavyClass
{
//properties
ManualResetEvent mre = new ManualResetEvent(false);
public void SleepThread()
{
Thread.Sleep(Timeout.Infinite);
//mre.WaitOne();
//They are the same behavior
}
public void HeavyRun()
{
//Do something takes really long time
//And doesn't have any loops
}
}
class MainWindow : Window
{
// properties
private HeavyClass heavyClass = new HeavyClass();
private void buttonStart_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
Thread t = new Thread(heavyClass.HeavyRun);
t.Start();
}
private void buttonPause_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
heavyClass.SleepThread();
}
}
Create an EventHandler<MainWindow> PauseThread inside the UI class, then write its handle inside the HeavyClass. When user click the Pause button, the UI class will trigger the event PauseThread(this, this).
class MainWindow : Window
{
// properties
private HeavyClass heavyClass = new HeavyClass();
public event EventHandler<MainWindow> PauseThread;
private void buttonStart_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
Thread t = new Thread(heavyClass.HeavyRun);
t.Start();
}
private void buttonPause_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
PauseThread(this, this);
}
}
class HeavyClass
{
// properties
ManualResetEvent mre = new ManualResetEvent(false);
public void HeavyRun()
{
MainWindow.PauseThread += (s, E) =>
{
Thread.Sleep(Timeout.Infinite);
//mre.WaitOne();
//They are the same behavior
};
//Do something takes really long time
//And doesn't have any loops
}
}
As I said above, I always paused the UI thread and the heavy task is still running.
And finally in the end, I've known the essence of my problem. That is: which thread calls Thread.Sleep() or WaitOne() will be blocked. Yeah, "which thread", not "which class".
Everything makes sense for me now. But that doesn't help me to achieve my goal. And that leads me to think that I am doing the seemingly impossible thing. It's clearly that I want to pause a thread by another thread. But that another thread is the one who calls any kinds of "suspend thread", so it is the one who is suspended. I don't have any idea about how to make the heavy method to be suspended by itself. It is running, how the hell it could know when the user click the Pause button?
I am at a total loss. Someone please help me to make my app works as expected.
By the way, this impossible thing makes me think that I am doing things wrong way, is it?
UPDATE: If you like to see my heavy task, actually it is very simple
class HeavyClass
{
public string filePath = "D:\\Desktop\\bigfile.iso";//This file is about 10GB
public string HeavyRun()
{
string MD5Hash;
MD5 md5 = MD5.Create();
Stream stream = File.OpenRead(filePath);
MD5Hash = Encoding.Default.GetString(md5.ComputeHash(stream));
return MD5Hash;
}
}

To make a thread suspendable, the work in the thread must be separable. In your case md5.ComputeHash(stream) will do all the work, and there is not way to make sure that thread will suspend at a right(saft) point inside md5.ComputeHash(stream). So you have to rewrite HeavyClass like below. Please notice that those codes are not the best approach of handling a thread, and I just try to keep it as same as the original.
class HeavyClass
{
MD5 _md5 = MD5.Create();
MethodInfo _hashCoreMI = _md5.GetType().GetMethod("HashCore", BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance);
MethodInfo _HashFinalMI = _md5.GetType().GetMethod("HashFinal", BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance);
WaitHandle _signal;
public void HeavyClass(WaitHandle signal)
{
_signal = signal;
}
public string HeavyRun(string filename)
{
byte[] buffer = new byte[4096];
int bytesRead = 0;
_signal.Set();
using(FileStream fs = File.OpenRead(filename))
{
while(true)
{
bytesRead = fs.Read(buffer, 0, 4096);
if (bytesRead > 0)
{
_hashCoreMI.Invoke(_md5, new object[] { buffer, 0, bytesRead });
}
else
{
break;
}
// if WaitHandle is signalled, thread will be block,
// otherwise thread will keep running.
_signal.WaitOne();
}
}
byte[] hash = _hashFinalMI.Invoke(_md5, null);
_md5.Initialize();
return Encoding.ASCII.GetString(hash);;
}
}
class MainWindow : Window
{
private HeavyClass _heavyClass;
private ManualResetEvent _mre;
public MainWindow()
{
InitializeComponent();
_mre = new ManualResetEvent(true);
_heavyClass = new HeavyClass(_mer);
}
private void buttonStart_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
Thread t = new Thread(heavyClass.HeavyRun("D:\\Desktop\\bigfile.iso"));
t.Start();
}
private void buttonPause_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
_mre.Reset();
}
private void buttonResume_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
_mre.Set();
}
}

C# (WPF) Async Thread with interface to GUI

thanks for reading this topic.
For a new WPF application (build in C#) I have a question regarding the design.
The past few days I have read a lot about Async programming in C# (based on .NET 4.5).
What we would like to do is: Create a new async thread, which does independent background tasks. When this thread has data available: then send this data to the main program (by an public interface). So, the thread will set data in the main program and immediately return to the thread again. The main program will raise an event (INotifyPropertyChanged) when data has been changed.
What will be the best way to create this Async thread? Or at least, what would be the best way to design this feature?
At the moment I have build an application which creates a thread.
This does not work Async at the moment:
public MainWindow()
{
InitializeComponent();
InitGuiInterface(this);
//Create thread
new OuterLabel_Thread(this);
}
And the class "OuterLabel_Thread.cs"here below:
public class OuterLabel_Thread
{
private MainWindow context = null;
private bool exit = false;
private int count = 0;
public OuterLabel_Thread(MainWindow context)
{
this.context = context;
Console.WriteLine("Running sample thread");
Thread thread = new Thread(delegate ()
{
Console.WriteLine("Sample thread started");
//start new task
//run();
Task.Factory.StartNew(run);
});
thread.Start();
}
public void Exit()
{
exit = true;
}
private void run()
{
while (!exit)
{
DateTime Time1 = DateTime.Now;
if (context != null && context.GuiInterface != null)
{
//context.GuiInterface.UpdateThreadCount(count, "label_code_content");
}
Console.WriteLine("Background thread count = " + count);
count++;
if (count > 1000)
{
exit = true;
}
//Console.WriteLine((DateTime.Now - Time1).TotalMilliseconds.ToString());
Thread.Sleep(10);
}
}
}
Many thanks in advance!
Kind regards,
Rein.

as you want to keep the thread alive and as far as I understand, you don't know exactly when or if you will reach the 1000 mark, async might be the wrong choice. Correct me if i'm wrong.
For your case I would recommend using the BackgroundWorker:
private void BackgroundWorker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
int count = 0;
BackgroundWorker worker = sender as BackgroundWorker;
while (!exit)
{
DateTime Time1 = DateTime.Now;
worker.ReportProgress(count);
count++;
if (count > 1000)
{
exit = true;
}
Thread.Sleep(10);
}
}
// This event handler updates the progress.
private void BackgroundWorker_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
resultLabel.Text = ("Background thread count = " + e.ProgressPercentage.ToString());
}
private void BackgroundWorker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if (e.Cancelled == true)
{
resultLabel.Text = "Canceled!";
}
else if (e.Error != null)
{
resultLabel.Text = "Error: " + e.Error.Message;
}
else
{
resultLabel.Text = "Done!";
}
}

The best way would be using async+await and tasks.
private async void LaunchButton_OnClick(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
resultLabel.Content = "Task running";
resultLabel.Content = await SomeLongRunningTaskAsync();
}
private Task<string> SomeLongRunningTaskAsync()
{
return Task.Run(
() =>
{
// Put your background work in here. with Task.Run it's not going to run on UI
int count = 0;
while (count < 1000)
{
count++;
Thread.Sleep(10);
}
return "Task done";
});
}

I can't figure out if you are looking for a service or a long running task.
Since the others have good examples of long running tasks I've made a Service
It uses some advanced concpets like SynchronizationContext that you should read up on before using this in production code. Google async await and Stephen Cleary.
public partial class MainWindow : Window
{
public MainWindow()
{
InitializeComponent();
var foo = new FooService();
foo.StartService(); // UI thrad calling
}
}
public class FooService
{
private SynchronizationContext _context;
private CancellationTokenSource _cts;
private CancellationToken _token;
private Task _task;
public void StartService()
{
_context = SynchronizationContext.Current; // Depends on the UI thread being the one to start the service or this will fail
_cts = new CancellationTokenSource(10000); // Run for 10 seconds
_token = _cts.Token;
_task = Task.Run(() => Run(), _token);
}
public async Task Stop()
{
_cts.Cancel();
await _task; // wait for task to finish
}
private void Run()
{
while (!_token.IsCancellationRequested)
{
// Do work
Thread.Sleep(1000);
// Alternative use Control.Invoke() if you have access to a UI element, to delegate to the UI thread
_context.Send((id) => Console.WriteLine($"Delegate from thread {id} to thread {Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId}"), Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId);
}
}
}

Deadlock in C++/CLI Wrapper

I have a c++/cli wrapper class which grabs frames from a camera and sends them as events.
A WPF test application Starts the camera, and updates the images.
When I click Stop, it usually ends in a deadlock, on m->streamThread->Join(). I'm suspecting the problem has to do with the frame handling event in the WPF, rather than the wrapper code.
namespace WpfTestApp
{
public partial class Window1 : Window
{
private void OnFrameArrived(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Action a = delegate
{
// this uses Imaging.CreateBitmapSourceFromMemorySection
// to copy the frame data to the image memory
m_colorImage.UpdateImage(e.Image);
};
Dispatcher.Invoke(a);
}
private void startBtn_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
m_camera.FrameArrived += m_frameHandler;
m_camera.Start();
}
private void Stop()
{
m_camera.FrameArrived -= m_frameHandler;
m_camera.Stop();
}
}
}
// Camera.h
public ref class Camera
{
public:
delegate void FrameArrivedHandler(Object^ sender, DGEventArgs^ e);
event FrameArrivedHandler^ FrameArrived;
void Start();
void Stop();
private:
void StreamThreadWorker();
Thread^ m_streamThread;
bool m_isStreaming;
}
// Camera.cpp
void Camera::Start()
{
if (m_isStreaming)
return;
m_isStreaming = true;
m_streamThread = gcnew Thread(gcnew ThreadStart(this, &Camera::StreamThreadWorker));
m_streamThread->Start();
}
void Camera::Stop()
{
if (!m_isStreaming)
return;
m_isStreaming = false;
m_streamThread->Join(); // stuck here
}
void Camera::StreamThreadWorker()
{
EventArgs^ eventArgs = gcnew EventArgs();
while (m_isStreaming)
{
eventArgs->Image = Camera->GetImage();
FrameArrived(this, eventArgs);
}
}

likely what happens is: you click Stop, this gets handled in the WPF ui dispatcher thread. So the Join call is in the ui dispatcher thread. However this same thread is also responsible for drawing the frames (the invoked call to UpdateImage). As a result, the StreamThreadWorker is waiting on FrameArrived to finish, but that cannot finish because the thread is waiting for Stop to finish. There's your deadlock.
So in order to get the StreamThreadWorker to finish, it must not be blocked by Stop. An easy way to achive this is to stop the thread from within another thread:
void Camera::Stop()
{
...
gcnew Thread( gcnew ThreadStart( this, &Camera::DoStopThread ) )->Start();
}
void Camera::DoStopThread()
{
if( !m_streamThread.Join( 3000 ) )
HandleThreadDidNotStopInTimeError(); //notify listeners there's a serious problem
m_streamThread.Abort();
m_streamThread = null;
RaiseThreadStoppedEvent(); //notify listeners that the thread stopped
}

C# - Thread Abort and System.NullReferenceException

I am doing a practise GUI Oven program using a thread, I am not sure if I should even be doing this because I want to interact with the GUI when the Heating process is ongoing. When I try to abort the thread by click btnStop_Click, it throws the NullReference exception:
System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
Please advice on how can I gracefully stop the thread. Thanks.
Code:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
private Thread t;
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
// button to begin heating
private void btnStart_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if ((txtMin.Text) == "" || (txtSec.Text) == "")
{
MessageBox.Show("Please enter duration of heating");
}
else
{
t = new Thread(heatIt);
btnHeat.Enabled = false;
t.Start();
}
}
//stop heating
private void btnStop_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Heating heat = new Heating();
Form1 l = new Form1();
l.Subscribe(heat);
heat.stopHeat();
btnHeat.Enabled = true;
}
private void heatIt()
{
// heat food Implementation that calls the 'Heating' class
}
public void Subscribe(Heating m)
{
m.heatComplete += SignalHeatCompleted;
m.heatStop += SignalStop;
}
private void SignalHeatCompleted(Heating m, EventArgs e)
{
MessageBox.Show( "Done, please enjoy your food");
return;
}
private void SignalStop(Heating m, EventArgs e)
{
t.Abort();
MessageBox.Show("Heating Terminated");
return;
}
public class Heating
{
public event HeatingCompleted heatComplete; // Heating Completed Event
public event HeatingStop heatStop; // Heating Stop Event
public EventArgs e = null;
public delegate void HeatingCompleted(Heating h, EventArgs e);
public delegate void HeatingStop(Heating s, EventArgs e);
public void startHeat(int temp, int min, int sec)
{
int totalSec;
totalSec = ((min*60) + sec) * 1000;
Thread.Sleep(totalSec);
if (heatComplete != null)
{
heatComplete(this, e);
}
else
{
//Use default signal if there's no subscription to this event
MessageBox.Show("*TING*");
}
return;
}
public void stopHeat()
{
if (heatStop != null)
{
heatStop(this, e);
}
}
}
}

You are creating a new instance of Form1 in your stop click event and so you are talking to a completely different t from the one in your start click.
You also probably want to have a single instance of Heat that you assign in heatIt and then use that reference in your stop click.
Also for background processing you probably want to look at the BackgroundWorker class to do the heavy lifting for you.

Several remarks:
You should never use Thread.Abort to stop background tasks. This is a bad practice, as it forces aborting the background thread regardless of its state. Use a volatile bool flag instead, and check (every once in a while) if its value has changed.
It seems that your Form represents a UI for business logic extracted into a separate class (Heating). In that case, it probably makes sense to have only a single instance per form, and put it in a private field. Right now you are creating a new instance inside your Stop method, which is probably wrong (since I presume you already use it in the heatIt method).
For each Subscribe method, try to keep a habit of adding a Unsubscribe method, which detaches event handlers at some point. This way GC can collect your listeners after they are no longer needed, and you prevent adding the same event handlers several times.
I would expect something like:
private Heating _heating;
private Thread _workerThread;
private volatile bool _stopRequest = false;
void Start_Btn_Pressed(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// create the private instance
_heating = new Heating();
Subscribe(_heating);
// start the thread
_stopRequest = false;
_workerThread = new Thread(HeatIt);
_workerThread.Start();
}
void Stop_Btn_Pressed(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// request stop
_stopRequest = true;
// wait until thread is finished
_workerThread.Join();
// unsubscribe
// ** note that a better place for unsubscribing
// might be at the end of the HeatIt method
Unsubscribe(_heating);
}
And, in your background worker method, you will need to have a loop which checks if _stopRequest has been set:
void HeatIt()
{
while (!_stopRequest && !finishedWork)
{
// do work
}
}
Note that you must have a place in your worker method which will check the _stopRequest flag. Otherwise the only way to stop it is to Abort it (like you did), which is not recommended.
Apart from that, you don't need to stop the thread (like you did in your SignalStop method) once the process is finished. When HeatIt method returns (ends), the thread will also end, and there is no need to do this.