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. :)

What is the proper way to Dispose of a class with a Timer?

Let's say I have a class which has a Timer object that doesn't do any critical work - just some GUI work. Let's say there are 2 scenarios where the timer elapses every 5 minutes:
in the Timer_Elapsed delegate there is a lot of work that is done and it takes 2 minutes to complete.
in the Timer_Elapsed delegate there is little work to be done and it takes a couple of milliseconds to complete
What is the proper way to dispose of the object & timer? Does the amount of time the Timer_Elapsed event delegate runs influence your decision on how to Dispose properly?

If, you need to stop your timer during disposal, and work could still be in progress in your timer delegate, that relies on shared resources, being disposed at the same time, you need to coordinate the "shutdown" process. The below snippet shows an example of doing this:
public class PeriodicTimerTask : IDisposable
{
private readonly System.Timers.Timer _timer;
private CancellationTokenSource _tokenSource;
private readonly ManualResetEventSlim _callbackComplete;
private readonly Action<CancellationToken> _userTask;
public PeriodicTimerTask(TimeSpan interval, Action<CancellationToken> userTask)
{
_tokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
_userTask = userTask;
_callbackComplete = new ManualResetEventSlim(true);
_timer = new System.Timers.Timer(interval.TotalMilliseconds);
}
public void Start()
{
if (_tokenSource != null)
{
_timer.Elapsed += (sender, e) => Tick();
_timer.AutoReset = true;
_timer.Start();
}
}
public void Stop()
{
var tokenSource = Interlocked.Exchange(ref _tokenSource, null);
if (tokenSource != null)
{
_timer.Stop();
tokenSource.Cancel();
_callbackComplete.Wait();
_timer.Dispose();
_callbackComplete.Dispose();
tokenSource.Dispose();
}
}
public void Dispose()
{
Stop();
GC.SuppressFinalize(this);
}
private void Tick()
{
var tokenSource = _tokenSource;
if (tokenSource != null && !tokenSource.IsCancellationRequested)
{
try
{
_callbackComplete.Wait(tokenSource.Token); // prevent multiple ticks.
_callbackComplete.Reset();
try
{
tokenSource = _tokenSource;
if (tokenSource != null && !tokenSource.IsCancellationRequested)
_userTask(tokenSource.Token);
}
finally
{
_callbackComplete.Set();
}
}
catch (OperationCanceledException) { }
}
}
}
Usage example:
public static void Main(params string[] args)
{
var periodic = new PeriodicTimerTask(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1), cancel => {
int n = 0;
Console.Write("Tick ...");
while (!cancel.IsCancellationRequested && n < 100000)
{
n++;
}
Console.WriteLine(" completed.");
});
periodic.Start();
Console.WriteLine("Press <ENTER> to stop");
Console.ReadLine();
Console.WriteLine("Stopping");
periodic.Dispose();
Console.WriteLine("Stopped");
}
With output like below:
Press <ENTER> to stop
Tick ... completed.
Tick ... completed.
Tick ... completed.
Tick ... completed.
Tick ... completed.
Stopping
Stopped

There are multiple approaches to this, and like Alex said in the comments it depends on whether or not objects the delegate will be using are also disposed.
Let's say we have a "worst-case" scenario, in which the delegate does need to use objects which would be disposed.
A good way to handle this would be similar to a method the Process object has: WaitForExit(). This method would simply loop until it sees the delegate is done working (have a working bool which is set before and after the delegate runs?) then returns. Now you can have something like this in the code using that class:
// Time to shut down
myDisposable.WaitForFinish();
myDisposable.Dispose();
Thus we are essentially ensuring the delegate is done before disposing of it, stopping any sort of ObjectDisposedException.

How to Wake up a sleeping thread?

I made a thread at load event like below:
Thread checkAlert = null;
bool isStop = false;
private void frmMain_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
checkAlert = new Thread(CheckAlert);
checkAlert.Start();
}
void CheckAlert()
{
while (!isStop)
{
Thread.Sleep(60000);
//do work here
}
}
Is there any way to resume the checkAlert thread during it's sleep period?( Thread.Sleep(60000);)
I tried using Thread.Interrupt() but it flows a ThreadInterruptedException, how should I handle this exception? or is there any way to resume the thread?
Edited:
I need to wake up the thread before the "sleep" end because when the user wants to quit the program, the program will have to wait for some time before it really quits ( checkAlert is still running) Is there any way to improve this case?

Based on your comments what it looks like is you need to re-design how CheckAlert works so it does not use Sleep's at all. What you should be doing is using a Timer instead.
System.Timers.Timer timer = null;
public FrmMain()
{
InitializeComponent();
timer = new System.Timers.Timer(60000);
timer.Elapsed += new ElapsedEventHandler(OnTimedEvent);
//If you want OnTimedEvent to happen on the UI thread instead of a ThreadPool thread, uncomment the following line.
//timer.SynchronizingObject = this;
if(this.components == null)
this.components = new System.ComponentModel.Container();
//This makes it so when the form is disposed the timer will be disposed with it.
this.componets.Add(timer);
}
private void frmMain_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
timer.Start();
}
private void OnTimedEvent(object source, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
//It is good practice not to do complicated logic in a event handler
// if we move the logic to its own method it is much easier to test (you are writing unit tests, right? ;) )
CheckAlert();
}
void CheckAlert()
{
//do work here
}
private void frmMain_Close(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
timer.Stop();
}

If you want the thread to exit automatically when your program quits, simply make it a background thread.
checkAlert = new Thread(CheckAlert);
checkAlert.IsBackground = true;
checkAlert.Start();

It looks to me like you're trying to create a thread which handles two types of events: do something and stop running.
Rather than using a shared variable (isStop) and some other technique to interrupt the thread in order to do work, you might want to use threading events (not to be confused high-level UI Event objects) to control your thread.
AutoResetEvent stop = new AutoResetEvent(false);
AutoResetEvent check = new AutoResetEvent(false);
private void CheckAlert() {
WaitHandle[] handles = new WaitHandle[] { stop, check };
for (;;) {
switch (AutoResetEvent.WaitAny(handles)) {
case 0:
return;
case 1:
// do work
break;
}
}
}
Calling check.Set() in your code will trigger the "do work" branch in the thread and stop.Set() will cause the thread to terminate gracefully.
Once your code has called stop.Set() to terminate the thread, it can call the thread's Join() method to wait until the thread terminates.
EDIT
I misunderstood the question. I will leave the code above in case anyone finds it useful.
If all you want to do is have a thread that performs a task once a minute and stop on demand, you can use the following code:
AutoResetEvent stop = new AutoResetEvent(false);
void CheckAlert() {
var time = new TimeSpan(0, 1, 0); // one minute
while (!stop.WaitOne(time)) {
// do work
}
}
private Thread checkThread;
private void frmMain_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) {
checkThread = new Thread(CheckAlert);
checkThread.Start();
}
private void frmMain_Close(object sender, EventArgs e) {
stop.Set(); // signal thread to stop
checkThread.Join(); // wait for thread to terminate
}

You can see an explanation on how to wake a sleeping thread here:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/tttdef8x%28v=vs.100%29.aspx
and this is a complete example (as you can see, Thread.Interrupt is the good choise... however you have to catch it to continue normal thread execution):
public class HVCSensor : HVCDevice, IDisposable
{
private Thread myThread;
private const int execute_timeout = ((10 + 10 + 6 + 3 + 15 + 15 + 1 + 1 + 15 + 10) * 1000);
private bool disposed = false;
private bool paused = false;
public delegate void HVCResultsHandler(HVC_RESULT res);
public event HVCResultsHandler HVCResultsArrived;
private void OnHVCResultsArrived(HVC_RESULT res)
{
if (HVCResultsArrived != null) {
HVCResultsArrived(res);
}
}
public HVCSensor() {
myThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(this.execute));
}
private void execute(){
while (!disposed) {
if (!paused && this.IsConnected)
{
HVC_RESULT outRes;
byte status;
try
{
this.ExecuteEx(execute_timeout, activeDetections, imageAcquire, out outRes, out status);
OnHVCResultsArrived(outRes);
}
catch (Exception ex) {
}
}
else {
try
{
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
catch (ThreadInterruptedException e)
{
}
}
}
}
public HVC_EXECUTION_IMAGE imageAcquire
{
get;
set;
}
public HVC_EXECUTION_FLAG activeDetections
{
get;
set;
}
public void startDetection() {
if(myThread.ThreadState==ThreadState.Unstarted)
myThread.Start();
}
public void pauseDetection() {
paused = true;
}
public void resumeDetection() {
paused = false;
if (myThread.ThreadState == ThreadState.WaitSleepJoin)
myThread.Interrupt();
}
// Implement IDisposable.
// Do not make this method virtual.
// A derived class should not be able to override this method.
public void Dispose()
{
disposed = true;
myThread.Interrupt();
}
}

How to use a Timer to replace Thread.Sleep(...) in an Azure Worker Role?

There's plenty of examples of people saying to use a Timer instead of Thread.Sleep(...) in an Azure Worker Role. No probs with that.
What I'm struggling to understand is how to code this.
Currently, I have the following (pseduo code)
_timer.Elapsed += (sender, args) => DoWork();
public override void Run()
{
while(true)
{
DoWork();
}
}
public void DoWork()
{
try
{
_timer.Stop();
// Now - do stuff ....
}
catch(....) { ... }
_timer.Start()
}
And what happens, is that the code enters the DoWork() method once and DoesStuff(tm).. fine .. starts the timer (say .. with a 30 second interval) and then exits that method.
Then, it returns back to the main Run() method .. which is in that loop. So it immediately comes back around and enters the DoWork() method again .. instead of waiting for the timer to fire it off.
So I'm not sure how to replace any Thread.Sleep(...) with Timers.
Any clues?
Clarification
I do not want to exit the Run() method :) I'm very happy to keep looping forever. What I'm stuck with, is replacing the standard Thread.Sleep(...) call (which blocks the thread) and replace that with a Timer, which most people suggest.
Update
Please do not link or suggest that I should use cancelSource.Token.WaitHandle.WaitOne(); as a solution. That is not what I'm trying to achieve here. Please note the post title!

I figure that if you want to solve this situation the way you outline here you will need a WaitHandle AND a Timer.
The short answer is here below. The long answer became a blog post: HowTo wait in a WorkerRole using Timer and EventWaitHandle over Thread.Sleep
I used an EventWaitHandle along with the Timer and came up with this solution:
public class WorkerRole : RoleEntryPoint
{
Waiter waiter;
public override bool OnStart()
{
waiter = new Waiter(WorkerConfiguration.WaitInterval);
return base.OnStart();
}
public override void Run()
{
while (true)
{
DoWork();
waiter.Wait();
}
}
public void DoWork()
{
// [...]
}
}
And here is the waiter class:
public class Waiter
{
private readonly Timer timer;
private readonly EventWaitHandle waitHandle;
public Waiter(TimeSpan? interval = null)
{
waitHandle = new AutoResetEvent(false);
timer = new Timer();
timer.Elapsed += (sender, args) => waitHandle.Set();
SetInterval(interval);
}
public TimeSpan Interval
{
set { timer.Interval = value.TotalMilliseconds; }
}
public void Wait(TimeSpan? newInterval = null)
{
SetInterval(newInterval);
timer.Start();
waitHandle.WaitOne();
timer.Close();
waitHandle.Reset();
}
private void SetInterval(TimeSpan? newInterval)
{
if (newInterval.HasValue)
{
Interval = newInterval.Value;
}
}
}

Is the System.Timers.Timer.Enabled property thread safe and so can it be accessed from the timer's Elapsed event?

I have an Elapsed method in which I have a while loop. If the timer is disabled/stopped from another thread, I would like this loop to stop. Can I rely on the timer's Enabled property in the Elapsed method for this or should I create a "volatile bool timerEnabled" variable just to be sure. My testings show that it's OK, but I'd like to be sure of this before putting it in production.
This is what I'm trying to achieve (not actual code but close)
private volatile bool isElapsedAlreadyRunning
void myTimer_Elapsed(object sender, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
if (!isElapsedAlreadyRunning) // to prevent reentrance
{
isElapsedAlreadyRunning = true;
try
{
while (myTimer.Enabled && some other condition)
{
do stuff
}
}
finally
{
isElapsedAlreadyRunning = false;
}
}
}
myTimer.Start() and myTimer.Stop() are in other methods that can be called frrom other threads
I'm using the System.Timers.Timer class
If you have any other comment or see any pitfall in this design feel free to comment :)
Thanks
Edit :
Man, threading is hard. Based on the answers and other stackoverflow questions (this answer particularly) this would be the way to do it (I hope this time it's OK)
public class NoLockTimer : IDisposable
{
private readonly System.Timers.Timer _timer;
private bool _isTimerStopped = false;
private readonly object _isTimerStoppedLock = new object();
public NoLockTimer()
{
_timer = new System.Timers.Timer { AutoReset = false, Interval = 1000 };
_timer.Elapsed += delegate
{
try
{
while (!IsTimerStopped && some other condition)
{
// do stuff
}
}
catch (Exception e)
{
// Do some logging
}
finally
{
if (!IsTimerStopped)
{
_timer.Start(); // <- Manual restart.
}
}
};
_timer.Start();
}
public void Stop()
{
IsTimerStopped = true;
if (_timer != null)
{
_timer.Stop();
}
}
private bool IsTimerStopped
{
get
{
lock (_isTimerStoppedLock)
{
return _isTimerStopped;
}
}
set
{
lock (_isTimerStoppedLock)
{
_isTimerStopped = value;
}
}
}
public void Dispose()
{
Stop();
if (_timer != null)
{
_timer.Dispose();
}
}
}

No, this is not safe. The Elapsed event handler is called on a threadpool thread. You cannot predict when that thread actually calls your method, it depends on what other TP threads are running in the process. Having two calls in flight at the same time is technically possible. Which makes the volatile keyword on the isElapsedAlreadyRunning variable not nearly good enough to ensure that the method is thread-safe, you must use the lock keyword or Monitor.TryEnter() instead.
This problem disappears when you set the Timer's AutoReset property to false. Be sure to restart the timer in a finally block, another nasty problem with the Timer.Elapsed event is that exceptions get swallowed without diagnostic. System.Threading.Timer is an all-around better timer with fewer surprises like this.
The Timer.Enabled property has a similar problem, you'll always see it late.

Your guard with isElapsedAlreadyRunning is obviously not thread-safe.
But you can simply replace it with a lock(...) { ...} statement.