We Keep Coding

Unhandled exception of type 'System.ApplicationException' occurred in System.Drawing.dll

I have a winforms app. In development mode, when debugging from Visual Studio .NET 2003 (Yes, I know it's old, but this is a legacy project), I get this error when I try to open a new form. In order to open a new form I get an instance of the form and then I call ShowDialog() method, for example:
frmTest test = new frmTest(here my parameters);
test.ShowDialog();
If I press F11 (step into) when debugging it is not crashing, but If in the line where I instantiate the form I press F10 to go into next line, that is, test.ShowDialog(), then it crashes showing this error.
The complete message error is:
"An unhandled exception of type 'System.ApplicationException' occurred
in System.drawing.dll. Additional Information: An attempt was made to
free a mutual exclusion that does not belong to the process"
I have translated last part: Additional information ... since it was appearing in spanish.
The form that I am instantiating with parameters, its constructor, consists on initialize some variables for example:
public frmTest(string param1, string param2)
{
InitializeComponent();
this.param1 = param1;
this.param2 = param2;
}
private void frmTest_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// here I call a remote webservice asynchronously.
}
Also my form "frmTest" has four pictureboxes, a label, and a button. Three of the pictureboxes contain a png image (it is assigned on design time through Image property), the last picturebox contains a animated gif, also loaded in design time through Image property. Maybe the error occurs due to these images?

TL;DR: Your web request handler will execute on a different thread. Ensure you don't do anything that isn't thread-safe in that handler. You can use Invoke to dispatch your callback handler's code to the main thread.
Diagnosis
The problem here is almost certainly hiding in the missing details of your asynchronous call.
// here I call a remote webservice asynchronously.
Asynchronously is a little bit too vague to be sure what exactly is happening, but there's a very good chance that the asynchronous mechanism that you are using has executed its callback on a different thread from the main UI thread.
Overview
This is common in the .NET model. Asynchronous I/O in the .NET model makes use of threads in a thread pool to handle I/O via I/O Completion Ports (IOCP). It means that when a call like Socket.BeginReceive or WebRequest.BeginGetResponse (or any .NET asynchronous web request that uses similar technology internally) completes, the callback will execute on a thread in the thread pool, not the main thread. This may be surprising to you, since you didn't actively create another thread; you just participated in making asynchronous calls.
You must be very careful about what you do in the callback from your web request as many user-interface / Windows Forms operations are not permitted on any thread other than the main UI thread. Similarly, it may not be the UI itself that is causing you problems, you may have just accessed some resource or object that is not thread safe. Many seemingly innocuous things can cause a crash or exception if you're not careful with multithreading.
To resolve the issue:
If in doubt, in your callback, as early as you can, dispatch (a.k.a. Invoke) the code in your handler so that it runs on the main thread.
A common pattern for doing this would be something like what follows below.
Suppose you have made a call like this:
IAsyncResult result = (IAsyncResult myHttpWebRequest.BeginGetResponse(
new AsyncCallback(RespoCallback), myRequestState);
The handler might be set up like this:
private static void RespCallback(IAsyncResult asynchronousResult)
{
// THIS IS NOT GOING TO WORK BECAUSE WE ARE ON THE WRONG THREAD. e.g.:
this.label1.Text = "OK"; // BOOM! :(
}
Instead, dispatch any necessary processing back to the main thread.
private static void RespCallback(IAsyncResult asynchronousResult)
{
this.Invoke((MethodInvoker) delegate {
// This block of code will run on the main thread.
// It is safe to do UI things now. e.g.:
this.label1.Text = "OK"; // HOORAY! :)
});
}
I'm not advising this as a general best practice. I'm not saying to just immediately dispatch all your handlers back to the main thread. One size does not fit all. You should really look at the specific details of what you do in your handler and ensure you aren't doing thread-specific things. But I am saying that in the absence of any kind of explanation from you about what your asynchronous handlers are doing, the problem would likely be solved by invoking the handler code on the main thread.
Note: Of course, to fix your problem with this technique, it requires that your main thread is running. If you blocked your main thread with a (bad) technique like the one in this example then you'll have to redesign part of your app. Here's an example of something that would require a bigger rework:
// Start the asynchronous request.
IAsyncResult result=
(IAsyncResult) myHttpWebRequest.BeginGetResponse(new AsyncCallback(RespCallback),myRequestState);
// this line implements the timeout, if there is a timeout, the callback fires and the request becomes aborted
ThreadPool.RegisterWaitForSingleObject (result.AsyncWaitHandle, new WaitOrTimerCallback(TimeoutCallback), myHttpWebRequest, DefaultTimeout, true);
// The response came in the allowed time. The work processing will happen in the
// callback function.
allDone.WaitOne(); // *** DANGER: This blocks the main thread, the IO thread
// won't be able to dispatch any work to it via `invoke`
Notice the WaitOne call? That blocks execution of the executing thread. If this code executes on the main thread, then the main thread will be blocked until the WebRequest completes. You'll have to redesign so that either you don't block the main thread (my recommendation) or that you more closely examine your callback handler to see why what it's doing is conflicting with other threads.

Application exceptions are not thrown by the framework itself: what-is-applicationexception-for-in-net; Problem should be in the code you have not the framework. Also be sure to check "InvokeRequired" property before taking the action and if it is, run the method using "Invoke" method. Can check c-sharp-cross-thread-call-problem for that.

May be the async call is trying to access UI thread.
Make sure you are not using control properties like TextBox.Text. If so, you just have to pass its value to the async call, or store it in a class variable before the call.
Also, inside an async call you can't assign values to that properties. Use Invoke() instead.

Try to add an exception breakpoint and VS will stop at the instruction causing the exception. The actual stacktrace may help.
Have You tried to close VS's local variable watch window? Maybe it is evaluating something for You on UI components where the accessing thread should be equal to owner thread of UI component!

Making C# callbacks between different threads

I working on a WPF GUI app that acts as socket server by using TcpListener class. TcpListener is configured to make an callback when data is received to the listened socket. However the problem is that TcpListener callback comes from another thread and causes following error when I try to touch GUI from the callback:
"Cross-thread operation not valid: Control 'slider' accessed from a thread other than the thread it was created on."
Any ideas how to solve this?
I'm familiar with Qt where this would be done with signal/slot system that can send events to another threads. Is there similar functionality in C#?

You should invoke your code in UI thread. Try to use Dispatcher
Application.Current.Dispatcher.Invoke(Callback):

You need to use the WPF Dispatcher class to invoke the method back to the UI thread - see
this

You want to use the Dispatcher.Invoke method.
If your this is DependencyObject class, you can simply use this:
this.Dispatcher.Invoke((Action)(() =>
{
slider.DoAnythingYouWant();
}));

You cannot directly access GUI elements from a separate (e.g. pulled from the thread pool for async operations or directly created with the Thread class). What you need to do is perform your action through the dispatcher, like so:
Application.Current.Dispatcher.Invoke(DispatcherPriority.Normal,
new Action(() => slider.Text = "mystuff"));
For more information on how the Dispatcher manages threading, see the MSDN link below:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/vstudio/system.windows.threading.dispatcher

Found the solution to make callback function completely in UI thread (CommandHandler is method in MainForm and called from another thread from AsynchronousSocketListener):
void CommandHandler()
{
if (InvokeRequired)
{
/* If called from a different thread, we must use the Invoke method to marshal the call to the proper thread. */
BeginInvoke(new AsynchronousSocketListener.ReadHandler(CommandHandler));
return;
}
else
{
//do UI thread code here
}
}
For those may need working example, stuff was done this way in Basler Pylon 4.0 library example program named PylonLiveView.

Skip windows messages when forcing execution of the Dispatcher queue

I am currently forced to update some part of the UI while some lengthy operation is performed on the UI thread. I know this should not be done, but - as I said - I am forced...
I have therefore added the following call to the location where the UI should be updated:
Dispatcher.Invoke(() => { }, DispatcherPriority.Render);
As you may know, this will force the Dispatcher Queue to be processed until all queued delegates up to (and including) priority Render have been executed. This way, the UI is updated although the UI thread is currently blocked.
Now, my problem is: When calling the Invoke method, the dispatcher queue does not only contain the delegates for re-rendering the UI, but obviously it also contains some custom Windows message. This Windows message is generated by our own application and it will be executed during the Invoke call. However, I do not want this because it introduces weird side effects! I only want the UI to be redrawn.
Is there any way to force UI rendering without processing any other Windows messages?
I tried to achieve this by calling some Win API functions:
private static readonly uint MSG1 = 0xC21E;
private static readonly uint MSG2 = 0xC25D;
// ...
while (PeekMessage(out msg, IntPtr.Zero, MSG1, MSG2, (uint)PeekMessageParams.PM_REMOVE))
{
TranslateMessage(ref msg);
DispatchMessage(ref msg);
}
MSG1 and MSG2 are messages that I found when I inspected the messages in the queue while the UI is blocked and my UI updates are done. I assumed that these messages have something to do with re-rendering the UI, but that assumption is not correct obviously. At least, the UI is not refreshed with the above code.
Any other ideas?
EDIT:
I just found the Dispatcher.Yield() method which was introduced in .NET 4.5. The documentation says:
Use this method if want to give your app a chance to process events while your app is doing a lot of work on the UI thread. For example, you can use this method in a long-running loop that updates a control.
Does anybody have any experience with this method?

Invoke(Delegate)

Can anybody please explain this statement written on this link
Invoke(Delegate):
Executes the specified delegate on the thread that owns the control's underlying window handle.
Can anybody explain what this means (especially the bold one) I am not able to get it clearly

The answer to this question lies in how C# Controls work
Controls in Windows Forms are bound to a specific thread and are not
thread safe. Therefore, if you are calling a control's method from a
different thread, you must use one of the control's invoke methods to
marshal the call to the proper thread. This property can be used to
determine if you must call an invoke method, which can be useful if
you do not know what thread owns a control.
From Control.InvokeRequired
Effectively, what Invoke does is ensure that the code you are calling occurs on the thread that the control "lives on" effectively preventing cross threaded exceptions.
From a historical perspective, in .Net 1.1, this was actually allowed. What it meant is that you could try and execute code on the "GUI" thread from any background thread and this would mostly work. Sometimes it would just cause your app to exit because you were effectively interrupting the GUI thread while it was doing something else. This is the Cross Threaded Exception - imagine trying to update a TextBox while the GUI is painting something else.
Which action takes priority?
Is it even possible for both to happen at once?
What happens to all of the other commands the GUI needs to run?
Effectively, you are interrupting a queue, which can have lots of unforeseen consequences. Invoke is effectively the "polite" way of getting what you want to do into that queue, and this rule was enforced from .Net 2.0 onward via a thrown InvalidOperationException.
To understand what is actually going on behind the scenes, and what is meant by "GUI Thread", it's useful to understand what a Message Pump or Message Loop is.
This is actually already answered in the question "What is a Message Pump" and is recommended reading for understanding the actual mechanism that you are tying into when interacting with controls.
Other reading you may find useful includes:
What's up with Begin Invoke
One of the cardinal rules of Windows GUI programming is that only the
thread that created a control can access and/or modify its contents
(except for a few documented exceptions). Try doing it from any other
thread and you'll get unpredictable behavior ranging from deadlock, to
exceptions to a half updated UI. The right way then to update a
control from another thread is to post an appropriate message to the
application message queue. When the message pump gets around to
executing that message, the control will get updated, on the same
thread that created it (remember, the message pump runs on the main
thread).
and, for a more code heavy overview with a representative sample:
Invalid Cross-thread Operations
// the canonical form (C# consumer)
public delegate void ControlStringConsumer(Control control, string text); // defines a delegate type
public void SetText(Control control, string text) {
if (control.InvokeRequired) {
control.Invoke(new ControlStringConsumer(SetText), new object[]{control, text}); // invoking itself
} else {
control.Text=text; // the "functional part", executing only on the main thread
}
}
Once you have an appreciation for InvokeRequired, you may wish to consider using an extension method for wrapping these calls up. This is ably covered in the Stack Overflow question Cleaning Up Code Littered with Invoke Required.
There is also a further write up of what happened historically that may be of interest.

A control or window object in Windows Forms is just a wrapper around a Win32 window identified by a handle (sometimes called HWND). Most things you do with the control will eventually result in a Win32 API call that uses this handle. The handle is owned by the thread that created it (typically the main thread), and shouldn't be manipulated by another thread. If for some reason you need to do something with the control from another thread, you can use Invoke to ask the main thread to do it on your behalf.
For instance, if you want to change the text of a label from a worker thread, you can do something like this:
theLabel.Invoke(new Action(() => theLabel.Text = "hello world from worker thread!"));

If you want to modify a control it must be done in the thread in which the control was created. This Invoke method allows you to execute methods in the associated thread (the thread that owns the control's underlying window handle).
In below sample thread1 throws an exception because SetText1 is trying to modify textBox1.Text from another thread. But in thread2, Action in SetText2 is executed in the thread in which the TextBox was created
private void btn_Click(object sender, EvenetArgs e)
{
var thread1 = new Thread(SetText1);
var thread2 = new Thread(SetText2);
thread1.Start();
thread2.Start();
}
private void SetText1()
{
textBox1.Text = "Test";
}
private void SetText2()
{
textBox1.Invoke(new Action(() => textBox1.Text = "Test"));
}

Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate{ textBox1.Text = "Test"; });

In practical terms it means that the delegate is guaranteed to be invoked on the main thread. This is important because in the case of windows controls if you don't update their properties on the main thread then you either don't see the change, or the control raises an exception.
The pattern is:
void OnEvent(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (this.InvokeRequired)
{
this.Invoke(() => this.OnEvent(sender, e);
return;
}
// do stuff (now you know you are on the main thread)
}

this.Invoke(delegate) make sure that you are calling the delegate the argument to this.Invoke() on main thread/created thread.
I can say a Thumb rule don't access your form controls except from main thread.
May be the following lines make sense for using Invoke()
private void SetText(string text)
{
// InvokeRequired required compares the thread ID of the
// calling thread to the thread ID of the creating thread.
// If these threads are different, it returns true.
if (this.textBox1.InvokeRequired)
{
SetTextCallback d = new SetTextCallback(SetText);
this.Invoke(d, new object[] { text });
}
else
{
this.textBox1.Text = text;
}
}
There are situations though you create a Threadpool thread(i.e worker thread) it will run on main thread. It won't create a new thread coz main thread is available for processing further instructions. So First investigate whether the current running thread is main thread using this.InvokeRequired if returns true the current code is running on worker thread so call
this.Invoke(d, new object[] { text });
else directly update the UI control(Here you are guaranteed that you are running the code on main thread.)

It means that the delegate will run on the UI thread, even if you call that method from a background worker or thread-pool thread. UI elements have thread affinity - they only like talking directly to one thread: the UI thread. The UI thread is defined as the thread that created the control instance, and is therefore associated with the window handle. But all of that is an implementation detail.
The key point is: you would call this method from a worker thread so that you can access the UI (to change the value in a label, etc) - since you are not allowed to do that from any other thread than the UI thread.

Delegate are essentially inline Action's or Func<T>. You can declare a delegate outside the scope of a method which you are running or using a lambda expression(=>); because you run the delegate within a method, you run it on the thread which is being run for the current window/application which is the bit in bold.
Lambda example
int AddFiveToNumber(int number)
{
var d = (int i => i + 5);
d.Invoke(number);
}

It means that the delegate you pass is executed on the thread that created the Control object (which is the UI thread).
You need to call this method when your application is multi-threaded and you want do some UI operation from a thread other than the UI thread, because if you just try to call a method on a Control from a different thread you'll get a System.InvalidOperationException.

How to check a thread is done, then fill progress bar in C# / WPF

I am just working on my first GUI application on Windows.
I have a WPF GUI to a small C# utility which copies files. When the button is clicked to copy, I obviously don't want the GUI to hang. So, I fire off a new thread to run the method which copies the files. I assume I'm on track so far and there's no "better" way of doing it in C#?
Now, I have a ProgressBar which I want to appear filled when the thread is done. (It's fine running as indeterminate for now). How do I check when the copying is done?
So, so far I have:
Thread t = new Thread(delegate()
{
po.Organise(inputPath, outputPath, recursive);
});
t.Start();
PBar.IsIndeterminate = true;
And I want something after that that works like:
if (t.Done)
{
PBar.Value = 100;
}

Have a look at the BackgroundWorker class. It supports events like RunWorkerCompleted or ProgressChanged.
Have a look here, too (this is about threading in general + backgroundworker, again).

As already stated, consider the use of the BackgroundWorker class. It was designed for these situations and exposes events suited for what you are trying to accomplish.
Use the ProgressChangedevent to report progress incrementally and the RunWorkerCompleted for when the task finishes. Check the MSDN page for code samples.

Wrap the if (t.Done) block in its own method. Invoke this method from the end of your worker thread.
Also, you might want to give the worker thread a name to make it easier to spot in the debugger.

You need a callback method. This should get you started. It uses an AsyncCallback, which is the best way to tackle this type of issue.
I just looked up an example I've been using for a project and stripped out the code specific to my app:
System.Windows.Forms.MethodInvoker mi = new System.Windows.Forms.MethodInvoker(delegate()
{
// Do your file copy here
});
AsyncCallback ascb = new AsyncCallback(delegate(IAsyncResult ar)
{
this.Dispatcher.Invoke(new ThreadStart(delegate (){
// set progressbar value to 100 here
}), null);
});
mi.BeginInvoke(ascb, null);

The quick and easy hack would be to just update the UI at the end of your anonymous method in your thread. Obviously you can't update it directly, but you can use Dispatcher.Invoke:
Thread t = new Thread(delegate()
{
po.Organise(inputPath, outputPath, recursive);
Dispatcher.Invoke(new Action(()=>{PBar.Value = 100;}),null);
});
t.Start();

As a general Windows programming principal, you have to make calls to update the UI from the UI thread (the one that is processing messages through a message pump).
In Windows Forms, the way that this was done was through the implementation of the ISynchronizeInvoke interface on the Control class, primarily through the implementation of the Invoke method.
With the release of .NET 2.0, it was realized that a better mechanism was needed to marshal calls into the correct context. That's where the SynchronizationContext comes in.
This class abstracts the interface you would use for marshaling calls to different contexts, allowing for specific implementations depending on the context.
So whether or not Windows Forms is the environment, or WPF, one call can be made in the same way across those contexts with the same effect (marshaling the call).
In your particular case, because you are using a closure (anonymous method), you can take advantage of the fact that a SynchronizationContext is available to you (through the static Current property) at the invocation site of the Thread to provide the mechanism to call back to the UI thread from your background thread:
// Get the synchronization context.
// This is in the UI thread.
SynchronizationContext sc = SynchronizationContext.Current;
// Create the thread, but use the SynchronizationContext
// in the closure to marshal the call back.
Thread t = new Thread(delegate()
{
// Do your work.
po.Organise(inputPath, outputPath, recursive);
// Call back using the SynchronizationContext.
// Can call the Post method if you don't care
// about waiting for the result.
sc.Send(delegate()
{
// Fill the progress bar.
PBar.Value = 100;
});
});
// Make the progress bar indeterminate.
PBar.IsIndeterminate = true;
// Start the thread.
t.Start();
Note, if you don't care about waiting for the result of the call back to the UI thread, you can make a call to the Post method instead, which will dispatch the call to the UI thread without waiting for that call to complete.