We Keep Coding

How do I add and subtract event handlers inside a derived abstract class?

Short version
In my abstract class MyCbo_Abstract (derived from ComboBox class), I want to create a custom property that when set will subtract all the control's event handlers, set the base property value, then re-add all the control's event handlers.
What I have so far
I have a concrete ComboBox class derived from an abstract ComboBox class derived from Microsoft's ComboBox class.
public abstract class MyCbo_Abstract : ComboBox
{
public MyCbo_Abstract() : base()
{
}
}
public partial class MyCboFooList : MyCbo_Abstract
{
public MyCboFooList() : base()
{
}
}
My main Form class subscribes to certain base ComboBox events.
Note: The designer has: this.myCboFooList = new MyCboFooList();
public partial class FormMain : Form
{
public FormMain()
{
myCboFooList.SelectedIndexChanged += myCboFooList_SelectedIndexChanged;
}
private void myCboFooList_SelectedIndexChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// do stuff
}
}
There are times when I want to suppress the invocation of defined event handlers, e.g., when I programmatically set a ComboBox object's SelectedIndex property.
Instead of having to remember to write the code to subtract and re-add event handlers each time I want to modify the SelectedIndex property and suppress its events, I want to create a custom property SelectedIndex_NoEvents that when set will subtract all the control's event handlers, set the base property value SelectedIndex, then re-add all the control's event handlers.
The problem
My problem is that I don't know how to iterate over a EventHandlerList because it has no GetEnumerator. And, in looking at the list in the debugger, saveEventHandlerList is a weird chained thing that I can't figure out how to otherwise traverse.
public abstract class MyCbo_Abstract : ComboBox
{
int selectedIndex_NoEvents;
public int SelectedIndex_NoEvents
{
get
{
return base.SelectedIndex;
}
set
{
EventHandlerList saveEventHandlerList = new EventHandlerList();
saveEventHandlerList = Events;
//foreach won't work - no GetEnumerator available. Can't use for loop - no Count poprerty
foreach (EventHandler eventHandler in saveEventHandlerList)
{
SelectedIndexChanged -= eventHandler;
}
base.SelectedIndex = value;
//foreach won't work - no GetEnumerator available. Can't use for loop - no Count poprerty
foreach (EventHandler eventHandler in saveEventHandlerList)
{
SelectedIndexChanged += eventHandler;
}
saveEventHandlerList = null;
}
}
//Probably don't need this
public override int SelectedIndex
{
get
{
return base.SelectedIndex;
}
set
{
base.SelectedIndex = value;
}
}
public DRT_ComboBox_Abstract() : base()
{
}
}

Before giving you the solution that I created, let me say that this feels extremely hacky. I urge you to seriously think about another solution. There may be all kinds of crazy edge cases where this code breaks down, I haven't thoroughly tested it beyond the example code shown below.
Add the following utility class:
public class SuspendedEvents
{
private Dictionary<FieldInfo, Delegate> handlers = new Dictionary<System.Reflection.FieldInfo, System.Delegate>();
private object source;
public SuspendedEvents(object obj)
{
source = obj;
var fields = obj.GetType().GetFields(BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Public);
foreach (var fieldInfo in fields.Where(fi => fi.FieldType.IsSubclassOf(typeof(Delegate))))
{
var d = (Delegate)fieldInfo.GetValue(obj);
handlers.Add(fieldInfo, (Delegate)d.Clone());
fieldInfo.SetValue(obj, null);
}
}
public void Restore()
{
foreach (var storedHandler in handlers)
{
storedHandler.Key.SetValue(source, storedHandler.Value);
}
}
}
You can use it like this:
var events = new SuspendedEvents(obj); //all event handlers on obj are now detached
events.Restore(); // event handlers on obj are now restored.
I used the following test setup:
void Main()
{
var obj = new TestObject();
obj.Event1 += (sender, e) => Handler("Event 1");
obj.Event1 += (sender, e) => Handler("Event 1");
obj.Event2 += (sender, e) => Handler("Event 2");
obj.Event2 += (sender, e) => Handler("Event 2");
obj.Event3 += (sender, e) => Handler("Event 3");
obj.Event3 += (sender, e) => Handler("Event 3");
Debug.WriteLine("Prove events are attached");
obj.RaiseEvents();
var events = new SuspendedEvents(obj);
Debug.WriteLine("Prove events are detached");
obj.RaiseEvents();
events.Restore();
Debug.WriteLine("Prove events are reattached");
obj.RaiseEvents();
}
public void Handler(string message)
{
Debug.WriteLine(message);
}
public class TestObject
{
public event EventHandler<EventArgs> Event1;
public event EventHandler<EventArgs> Event2;
public event EventHandler<EventArgs> Event3;
public void RaiseEvents()
{
Event1?.Invoke(this, EventArgs.Empty);
Event2?.Invoke(this, EventArgs.Empty);
Event3?.Invoke(this, EventArgs.Empty);
}
}
It produces the following output:
Prove events are attached
Event 1
Event 1
Event 2
Event 2
Event 3
Event 3
Prove events are detached
Prove events are reattached
Event 1
Event 1
Event 2
Event 2
Event 3
Event 3

There is no way to easily disable event firing of WinForm controls exposed in the .Net framework. However, the Winform controls follow a standard design pattern for events in that all event signatures are based on the EventHandler Delegate and the registered event handlers are stored in an EventHandlerList that is defined in the Control Class. This list is stored in a field (variable) named "events" and is only publicly exposed via the read-only property Events.
The class presented below uses reflection to temporarily assign null to the events field effectively removing all event handlers registered for the Control.
While it may be an abuse of the pattern, the class implements the IDisposable Interface to restore the events field on disposal of the class instance. The reason for this is to facilitate the use of the using block to wrap the class usage.
public class ControlEventSuspender : IDisposable
{
private const string eventsFieldName = "events";
private const string headFieldName = "head";
private static System.Reflection.FieldInfo eventsFieldInfo;
private static System.Reflection.FieldInfo headFieldInfo;
private System.Windows.Forms.Control target;
private object eventHandlerList;
private bool disposedValue;
static ControlEventSuspender()
{
Type compType = typeof(System.ComponentModel.Component);
eventsFieldInfo = compType.GetField(eventsFieldName, System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Instance | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.NonPublic);
headFieldInfo = typeof(System.ComponentModel.EventHandlerList).GetField(headFieldName, System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Instance | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.NonPublic);
}
private static bool FieldInfosAquired()
{
if (eventsFieldInfo == null)
{
throw new Exception($"{typeof(ControlEventSuspender).Name} could not find the field '{ControlEventSuspender.eventsFieldName}' on type Component.");
}
if (headFieldInfo == null)
{
throw new Exception($"{typeof(ControlEventSuspender).Name} could not find the field '{ControlEventSuspender.headFieldName}' on type System.ComponentModel.EventHandlerList.");
}
return true;
}
private ControlEventSuspender(System.Windows.Forms.Control target) // Force using the the Suspend method to create an instance
{
this.target = target;
this.eventHandlerList = eventsFieldInfo.GetValue(target); // backup event hander list
eventsFieldInfo.SetValue(target, null); // clear event handler list
}
public static ControlEventSuspender Suspend(System.Windows.Forms.Control target)
{
ControlEventSuspender ret = null;
if (FieldInfosAquired() && target != null)
{
ret = new ControlEventSuspender(target);
}
return ret;
}
protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing)
{
if (!this.disposedValue)
{
if (disposing)
{
if (this.target != null)
{
RestoreEventList();
}
}
}
this.disposedValue = true;
}
public void Dispose()
{
Dispose(true);
}
private void RestoreEventList()
{
object o = eventsFieldInfo.GetValue(target);
if (o != null && headFieldInfo.GetValue(o) != null)
{
throw new Exception($"Events on {target.GetType().Name} (local name: {target.Name}) added while event handling suspended.");
}
else
{
eventsFieldInfo.SetValue(target, eventHandlerList);
eventHandlerList = null;
target = null;
}
}
}
Example usage in the button1_Click method:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
using (ControlEventSuspender.Suspend(comboBox1))
{
comboBox1.SelectedIndex = 3; // SelectedIndexChanged does not fire
}
}
private void button2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
comboBox1.SelectedIndex = -1; // clear selection, SelectedIndexChanged fires
}
private void button3_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
comboBox1.SelectedIndex = 3; // SelectedIndexChanged fires
}
private void comboBox1_SelectedIndexChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Console.WriteLine("index changed fired");
System.Media.SystemSounds.Beep.Play();
}
}
SoapBox Diatribe
Many will say that the use of Reflection to access non-public class members is dirty or some other derogatory term and that it introduces a brittleness to the code as someone may change the underlying code definition such that the code that relies on member names (magic strings) is no longer valid. This is a valid concern, but I view it as no different than code that accesses external databases.
Reflection can be thought of a query of a type (datatable) from an assembly (database) for specific fields (members: fields, properties, events). It is no more brittle than a SQL statement such as Select SomeField From SomeTable Where AnotherField=5. This type of SQL code is prevent in the world and no one thinks twice about writing it, but some external force could easily redefine the database you code relies on an render all the magic string SQL statements invalid as well.
Use of hard coded names is always at risk of being made invalid by change. You have to weigh the risks of moving forward versus the option of being frozen in fear of proceeding because someone wants to sound authoritative (typically a parroting of other such individuals) and criticize you for implementing a solution that solves the current problem.

I was hoping to write code that would programatically locate all event handler method names created using controlObject.Event += EventHandlerMethodName, but as you see in the other answers, code to do this is complicated, limited, and perhaps not able to work in all cases
This is what I came up with. It satisfies my desire to consolidate the code that subtracts and re-adds event handler method names into my abstract class, but at the expense of having to write code to store and manage event handler method names and having to write code for each control property where I want to suppress the event handler, modify the property value, and finally re-add the event handler.
public abstract class MyCbo_Abstract : ComboBox
{
// create an event handler property for each event the app has custom code for
[DesignerSerializationVisibility(DesignerSerializationVisibility.Hidden)]
private EventHandler evSelectedValueChanged;
[DesignerSerializationVisibility(DesignerSerializationVisibility.Hidden)]
public EventHandler EvSelectedValueChanged { get => evSelectedValueChanged; set => evSelectedValueChanged = value; }
public MyCbo_Abstract() : base()
{
}
// Create a property that parallels the one that would normally be set in the main body of the program
public object _DataSource_NoEvents
{
get
{
return base.DataSource;
}
set
{
SelectedValueChanged -= EvSelectedValueChanged;
if (value == null)
{
base.DataSource = null;
SelectedValueChanged += EvSelectedValueChanged;
return;
}
string valueTypeName = value.GetType().Name;
if (valueTypeName == "Int32")
{
base.DataSource = null;
SelectedValueChanged += EvSelectedValueChanged;
return;
}
//assume StringCollection
base.DataSource = value;
SelectedValueChanged += EvSelectedValueChanged;
return;
}
}
}
public partial class MyCboFooList : MyCbo_Abstract
{
public MyCboFooList() : base()
{
}
}
Designer has
this.myCboFooList = new MyCboFooList();
Main form code
public partial class FormMain : Form
{
public FormMain()
{
myCboFooList.SelectedValueChanged += OnMyCboFooList_SelectedValueChanged;
myCboFooList.EvSelectedValueChanged = OnMyCboFooList_SelectedValueChanged;
}
private void OnMyCboFooList_SelectedValueChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// do stuff
}
}
And now, if I want to set a property and suppress event(s), I can write something like the following and not have to remember to re-add the event handler method name
myCboFooList._DataSource_NoEvents = null;

Prevent self-callbacks when changing observed collection

Let's suppose I have an observable collection and two clients that want to:
change it,
observe it and react on state change.
Now, if Client1 changes collection state (for example: adds new item), the collection will fire 'CollectionChanged' event. Since both clients are registered for this event notifications, Client1's handling method will be executed.
In order to avoid self-callback on Client1, I unsubscribe from an event, do my action and subscribe again. This is painful - I must remember about suspending Client1's subscription every time Client1 touches the collection and it just seems like a bad smell. Is there a better way (design pattern, external library) that would help me in callbacks management?
Although in my example I mentioned ObservableCollection and CollectionChanged event, I believe my question is more generic and comes down to: "how to exclude an entity that caused event trigger from event callback".
Thanks in advance!
Problem keeps reoccuring in my solution, bumping the question in a hope someone might help out.

I ran into your problem some times ago I didn't find a proper solution except for this one.
The idea is that when you change the collection you also pass an instance of the object changing it.
Then when the Collection fires the event, it also passes the reference.
So all observers may know which instance did the change, and check for equality.
Here is a basic example of this implementation:
class Program
{
private static MyCollection Collection;
private static MyCollectionModifier Modif1;
private static MyCollectionModifier Modif2;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Collection = new MyCollection();
Modif1 = new MyCollectionModifier("Modifier 1", Collection);
Modif2 = new MyCollectionModifier("Modifier 2", Collection);
Modif1.AddItem("Test1");
Modif2.AddItem("Test2");
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
public class MyCollectionItemAddedEventArgs:EventArgs
{
public Object ChangeSource { get; set;}
public int newIndex {get;set;}
}
public delegate void MyCollectionItemAddedEventHandler(object sender, MyCollectionItemAddedEventArgs e);
public class MyCollection
{
private List<String> _myList;
public String this[int Index]
{
get { return _myList[Index]; }
}
public event MyCollectionItemAddedEventHandler ItemAdded;
public MyCollection()
{
_myList = new List<string>();
}
protected virtual void OnMyCollectionItemAdded(MyCollectionItemAddedEventArgs e)
{
if (ItemAdded != null)
ItemAdded(this, e);
}
public void AddItem(String Item, object ChangeSource = null)
{
_myList.Add(Item);
var e = new MyCollectionItemAddedEventArgs();
e.ChangeSource = ChangeSource;
e.newIndex = _myList.Count;
OnMyCollectionItemAdded(e);
}
}
public class MyCollectionModifier
{
private MyCollection _collection;
public string Name { get; set; }
public MyCollectionModifier(string Name, MyCollection Collection)
{
this.Name = Name;
_collection = Collection;
_collection.ItemAdded += Collection_ItemAdded;
}
public void AddItem(string Item)
{
_collection.AddItem(Item, this);
}
void Collection_ItemAdded(object sender, MyCollectionItemAddedEventArgs e)
{
if (e != null)
{
if (this.Equals(e.ChangeSource))
{
Console.WriteLine("{0} : I changed the collection", Name);
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("{0} : Somebody else changed the collection", Name);
}
}
}
}

I've encountered this problem before as well.
Best solution I could come up with is to create extension methods that take the handler of the caller and then automate the unsubscribe/subscribe around the called method, that way you don't have to remember to do it each time and it does not end up cluttering your code either
public static void Add<T>(this ObservableCollection<T> self, T itemToAdd, NotifyCollectionChangedEventHandler handler)
{
self.CollectionChanged -= handler;
self.Add(itemToAdd);
self.CollectionChanged += handler;
}
It does take some effort to create the extensions initially but at least you won't forget to resubscribe. Only real extra code is then around invoking the method
public class ObserverClass
{
public ObserverClass()
{
ObservableIntegers.CollectionChanged += ObservableIntegersOnCollectionChanged;
//Add item to collection while preventing self-handling the callback
ObservableIntegers.Add(1, ObservableIntegersOnCollectionChanged);
}
private void ObservableIntegersOnCollectionChanged(object sender, NotifyCollectionChangedEventArgs notifyCollectionChangedEventArgs)
{
// Handle collection change
}
public ObservableCollection<int> ObservableIntegers { get; set; }
}

C# - Check and notify of boolean value changed

Good day all
I am struggling to familiarize myself with Events, I just can't seem to get my head around the concept, after quite a few tutorials and videos, I am still lost, thus I will be specific about my problem.
In short, a thread pings an IP, if the ping reports a success,
ServerOnline = (ping == success ) ? true : false;
The event listener should "listen" for a variable change, get the variable and process accordingly.
A example based on the code below would be of an immense help.
class tcp_connector
{
bool ServerOnline
void thread_checkServer()
{
//do code
ServerOnline = true;
//notify of variable change
}
}
class tcp_sender
{
//when ServerOnline bool = true
//button.color = color.green;
}

You can declare an event in your tcp_connector that you raise if ServerOnline changes like this:
class tcp_connector
{
// standard event pattern
public event EnventHandler ServerOnlineChanged;
protected virtual void OnServerOnlineChanged
{
EventHandler handler = ServerOnlineChanged; // for thread safety
if (handler != null)
handler(this, EventArgs.Empty);
}
private bool _serverOnline;
public bool ServerOnline // implement as property
{
get { return _serverOnline; }
set {
if (_serverOnline == value) return;
_serverOnline = value;
OnServerOnlineChanged(); // raise event
}
}
void thread_checkServer()
{
//do code
// be sure to use the property ServerOnline, not the
// field _serverOnline!
// the property setter will raise ServerOnlineChangedEvent
ServerOnline = true;
}
}
And then you can consume that event in your tcp_sender like this:
class tcp_sender
{
private tcp_connector _connector;
public tcp_sender()
{
_connector = new tcp_connector();
// subscribe to event
_connector.ServerOnlineChanged += tcp_connector_ServerOnlineChanged;
}
// the event handler for the ServerOnlineChanged event
private void tcp_connector_ServerOnlineChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (_connector.ServerOnline)
button.color = color.green;
}
}
This is not really a "listener" that watches your property ServerOnline, but by seperating it into a field and a property you can recognize changes and raise the specified event.

Prevent next event handler being called

I have two event handlers wired up to a button click in a Windows form like so:
this.BtnCreate.Click += new System.EventHandler(new RdlcCreator().FirstHandler);
this.BtnCreate.Click += new System.EventHandler(this.BtnCreate_Click);
both are being called correctly.
However is it possible within FirstHandler() to prevent BtnCreate_Click() being executed? Something like:
void FirstHandler(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (ConditionSatisfied)
//Prevent next handler in sequence being executed
}
I know I could just unsubscribe the event, but can this be done programmatically (from within the method)?

As far as I know there is no solution for this. That's because there is no guarantee for the order in which the event handlers are called when the event happens.
Because of that you are not supposed to rely on their order in any way.

Why don't you just replace them with one eventhandler? Something like this:
var rdlc = new RdlcCreator();
this.BtnCreate.Click += (sender, e) => {
rdlc.FirstHandler(sender, e);
if (!rdlc.HasHandledStuff) { // <-- You would need some kind of flag
this.BtnCreate_Click(sender, e);
}
};
That way you can also guarantee the order of the handlers. Alternatively, use the above implementation, but change the signature of FirstHandler to return a bool indicating the condition (as in this case it doesn't really need to have the event's signature anymore):
if (!rdlc.FirstHandler(sender, e)) {
this.BtnCreate_Click(sender, e);
}
EDIT: OR, you just pass the second handler to FirstHandler.
Change the signature of FirstHandler to this:
void FirstHandler(object sender, EventArgs e, EventHandler nextHandler) {
if (ConditionSatisfied) {
// do stuff
}
else if (nextHandler != null) {
nextHandler(sender, e);
}
}
and then:
this.BtnCreate.Click +=
(s, e) => new RdlcCreator().Firsthandler(s, e, this.BtnCreate_Click);

System.ComponentModel namespace contains a CancelEventHandler delegate which is used for this purpose. One of the arguments it provides is a CancelEventArgs instance which contains a boolean Cancel property which can be set be any of the handlers to signal that execution of the invocation list should be stopped.
However, to attach it to a plain EventHandler delegate, you will need to create your own wrapper, something like:
public static class CancellableEventChain
{
public static EventHandler CreateFrom(params CancelEventHandler[] chain)
{
return (sender, dummy) =>
{
var args = new CancelEventArgs(false);
foreach (var handler in chain)
{
handler(sender, args);
if (args.Cancel)
break;
}
};
}
}
For your example, you would use it like this:
this.BtnCreate.Click += CancellableEventChain.CreateFrom(
new RdlcCreator().FirstHandler,
this.BtnCreate_Click
/* ... */
);
Of course, you would need to capture the created chain handler in a field if you need to unsubscribe (detach) it later.

Add the following condition in this.BtnCreate_Click which is the the second event
BtnCreate_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (!ConditionSatisfied) //Prevent next handler in sequence being executed
{
// your implementation goes here
}
}

I suggest you to create a some kind of class wrapper. So, you could store there some kind of event flag group (16bit integer, for example) and a few methods to set or unset individual bits (where each means to invoke or not particular EventHandler). You can easily store any count of the Eventhandlers or even Actions, in the class, and invoke in any order you want.

Was finding the solution to the same question, but no luck. So had to resolve myself.
A base class for Cancelable event args
public class CancelableEventArgs
{
public bool Cancelled { get; set; }
public void CancelFutherProcessing()
{
Cancelled = true;
}
}
Next defines the extension method for the EventHandler, note that Invocation List subscribers invoked in backward order (in my case UI elements subscibe the event as they added to components, so which element is rendered later has most visiblility and more priority)
public static class CommonExtensions
{
[MethodImpl(MethodImplOptions.AggressiveInlining)]
public static void SafeInvokeWithCancel<T>(this EventHandler<T> handler, object sender, T args) where T : CancelableEventArgs
{
if (handler != null)
{
foreach (var d in handler.GetInvocationList().Reverse())
{
d.DynamicInvoke(sender, args);
if (args.Cancelled)
{
break;
}
}
}
}
And here is the usage
public class ChessboardEventArgs : CancelableEventArgs
{
public Vector2 Position { get; set; }
}
So if an UI element has some behaviour on the event, it cancells futher processing
game.OnMouseLeftButtonDown += (sender, a) =>
{
var xy = GetChessboardPositionByScreenPosition(a.XY);
if (IsInside(xy))
{
var args = new ChessboardEventArgs { Position = xy };
OnMouseDown.SafeInvokeWithCancel(this, args);
a.CancelFutherProcessing();
}
};

How to make only farthest child receive shared event?

I have run into a bit of a design issue with my code.
I have a object that creates a child object (the child could then create another child, etc), and both objects subscribe to the same event.
But, I only want the most child object to receive the event.
Overview of what my project is:
I am creating a IVR system. When a user calls into the system, the user will have X menu choices. Based on what the user chooses they will have a sub menu of choices, and so on and so on. I am using State Machines for this. Every State Machine needs to "listen" for when the user presses a number on their phone. But only the current State Machine needs to process the entered number. Each State Machine can create a new State Machine to represent the sub menu.
Here is some sample code:
Base class:
public delegate void DoSomething(object sender, EventArgs data);
public class Base
{
public event DoSomething myEvent;
private IObject foo;
public Base ()
{
foo = new myObjectA(this);
}
public void SomeAction()
{
((myObjectA)foo).CreateChild();
}
public void EventFired()
{
if (myEvent != null)
{
myEvent(this, new EventArgs());
}
}
}
ObjectA:
class myObjectA : IObject
{
private Base theCallingObject;
private IObject child;
public myObjectA (Base _base)
{
theCallingObject = _base;
theCallingObject.myEvent += new DoSomething(theCallingObject_myEvent);
}
public void CreateChild()
{
child = new myObjectB(theCallingObject);
}
void theCallingObject_myEvent(object sender, EventArgs data)
{
// Handle event
MessageBox.Show("myObjectA");
}
}
ObjectB:
class myObjectB : IObject
{
private Base theCallingObject;
public myObjectB (Base _base)
{
theCallingObject = _base;
theCallingObject.myEvent += new DoSomething(theCallingObject_myEvent);
}
void theCallingObject_myEvent(object sender, EventArgs data)
{
// Handle event
MessageBox.Show("myObjectB");
}
}
Now when I do this:
Base blah = new Base();
blah.SomeAction();
blah.EventFired();
I get message boxes for both A and B.
I need to implement Base so that only myObjectB gets the event.
I will have hundreds of myObject's so I need a implementation at the Base level and NOT the myObject level. Plus, handling it at the myObject level would still require the event to be fired causing performance issues if there are hundreds of objects.
One solution I have considered is when myObjectA creates the child, unsubscribe from the event, then resubscribe when we get back to the myObjectA level. However I feel something better could be done.
Anyone have any ideas?
Edit: Using payo's input I have come up with this:
public delegate void DoSomething(object sender, EventArgs data);
public class Base
{
private IObject foo;
private List<DoSomething> _myEventStorage;
public event DoSomething myEvent
{
add
{
_myEventStorage.Insert(0, value);
}
remove
{
_myEventStorage.Remove(value);
}
}
public Base ()
{
_myEventStorage = new List<DoSomething>();
foo = new myObjectA(this);
}
public void SomeAction()
{
((myObjectA)foo).CreateChild();
}
public void EventFired()
{
_myEventStorage[0].Invoke(this, new EventArgs());
}
}

you would need to explicitly implement myEvent (add/remove) handlers and track the "farthest" independently of the registered observers. then you can send the notification to that single instance.

For events, each subscriber is queued up (put at end of list), a FIFO model. You want the most-child object to 'own' the event, not just subscribe and be part of some abstract list of other unknown objects.
I would provide a new model that represents what you are trying to do. This might be what Jason recommended: (he posted his answer as I was typing this out)
public class Base
{
private DoSomething _myEventStorage;
public event DoSomething myEvent
{
add
{
_myEventStorage = value;
}
remove
{
_myEventStorage -= value;
}
}
...
public void EventFired()
{
if (_myEventStorage != null)
{
_myEventStorage(this, new ChainEventArgs());
}
}
}
This calls last ONLY. Another option (to add to this custom add/remove) would be to provide a derived EventArgs:
public class ChainEventArgs : EventArgs
{
public bool Handled { get; set; }
}
public delegate void DoSomething(object sender, ChainEventArgs data);
...
public event DoSomething myEvent
{
add
{
var temp = _myEventStorage;
_myEventStorage = null;
_myEventStorage += value;
_myEventStorage += temp; // now all are called, but FILO
}
remove
{
_myEventStorage -= value;
}
}
At this point, you can either check Handled on each IObject
void theCallingObject_myEvent(object sender, ChainEventArgs data)
{
if (data.Handled)
return;
if (I_want_to_block_parents)
data.Handled = true;
// else leave it false
}
Or, add some complexity to your Base class and stop calling up the chain (let's the children have no need to check Handled). I'll show the solution with a List<> of delegates, but some MulticaseDelegate casts and calls could do the same. I just feel the List<> code might be more readable/maintainable.
public class Base
{
private List<DoSomething> _myEventStorage;
public event DoSomething myEvent
{
add
{
_myEventStorage.Insert(0, value);
}
remove
{
_myEventStorage.Remove(value);
}
}
...
public void EventFired()
{
var args = new ChainEventArgs();
foreach (var handler in _myEventStorage)
{
handler(this, args);
if (args.Handled)
break;
}
}
}