We Keep Coding

Two Thread tasks in Winforms Continuously Checking Back

I am currently trying to keep a counter on C# on a local file folder for new files that are created.
I have two sub directories to CD and LP that I have to keep checking. With counters that makes sure that the count of folders made have not exceeded the count set by the user.
public static int LPmax { get; set; }
public static int CDmax { get; set; }
public static int LPcounter2 { get; set; }
public static int CDcounter2 { get; set; }
public static int LPCreated;
public static int CDCreated;
public static int oldLPCreated;
public static int oldCDCreated;
FileSystemWatcher CDdirWatcher = new FileSystemWatcher();
FileSystemWatcher LPdirWatcher = new FileSystemWatcher();
//watch method should run in the background as checker
public void watch()
{
CDdirWatcher.Path = #"C:\Data\LotData\CD";
CDdirWatcher.Filter = "EM*";
CDdirWatcher.NotifyFilter = NotifyFilters.DirectoryName | NotifyFilters.LastWrite;
CDdirWatcher.EnableRaisingEvents = true;
CDdirWatcher.Created += CDdirWatcher_Created;
LPdirWatcher.Path = #"C:\Data\LotData\LP";
LPdirWatcher.Filter = "EM*";
LPdirWatcher.NotifyFilter = NotifyFilters.DirectoryName;
LPdirWatcher.EnableRaisingEvents = true;
LPdirWatcher.Created += LPdirWatcher_Created;
Thread.Sleep(10);
}
private static void CDdirWatcher_Created(object sender, FileSystemEventArgs e)
{
CDCreated += 1;
}
private static void LPdirWatcher_Created(object sender, FileSystemEventArgs e)
{
LPCreated += 1;
}
The above method works fine, and the criteria is that it has to be less count then the one set
public void checker()
{
if(CDCreated>CDmax)
{
popupbx();
}
if(LPCreated>LPmax)
{
popupbx();
}
}
The problem is my main method where I have two threads which need to continuously check the two criteria to see if the counter has been exceeded.
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
//Implementing Threads asynchronously
Thread oThreadone = new Thread(() =>
{
//Do what u wanna……
watch();
});
Thread oThreadtwo = new Thread(() =>
{
//Do what u wanna……
checker();
});
//Calling thread workers
oThreadone.Start();
oThreadone.IsBackground = true;
oThreadtwo.Start();
oThreadtwo.IsBackground = true;
}
Mkdir fires the counters in debug mode, but thread two doesn't check for the counters after they fire.

The first major thing wrong with your code is that neither of threads you create are needed, nor do they do what you want. Specifically, the FileSystemWatcher object itself is already asynchronous, so you can create it in the main thread. In fact, you should, because there you could set FileSystemWatcher.SynchronizingObject to the current form instance so that it will raise its events in that object's synchronization context. I.e. your event handlers will be executed in the main thread, which is what you want.
So the first method, watch(), rather than being executed in a thread, just call it directly.
Which brings me to the second method, checker(). Your method for the thread doesn't loop, so it will execute the two tests, and then promptly exit. That's the end of that thread. It won't stay around long enough to monitor the counts as they are updated.
You could fix it by looping in the checker() method, so that it never exits. But then you run into problems of excessive CPU usage. Which you'll fix by adding sleep statements. Which then you're wasting a thread most of the time. Which you could fix by using async/await (e.g. await Task.Delay()). Except that would just unnecessarily complicate the code.
Instead, you should just perform each check after each count is updated. In theory, you could just display the message immediately. But that will block the event handler subscribed to FileSystemWatcher, possibly delaying additional reports. So you may instead prefer to use Control.BeginInvoke() to defer display of the message until after the event handler has returned.
So, taking all that into account, your code might instead look more like this:
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
watch();
}
private void CDdirWatcher_Created(object sender, FileSystemEventArgs e)
{
CDCreated += 1;
if (CDCreated > CDmax)
{
BeginInvoke((MethodInvoker)popupbx);
}
}
private static void LPdirWatcher_Created(object sender, FileSystemEventArgs e)
{
LPCreated += 1;
if (LPCreated > LPmax)
{
BeginInvoke((MethodInvoker)popupbx);
}
}
You can remove the checker() method altogether. The watch() method can remain as it is, though I would change the order of subscribing to the Created event and the assignment of EnableRaisingEvents. I.e. don't enable raising events until you've already subscribed to the event. The FileSystemWatcher is unreliable enough as it is, without you giving it a chance to raise an event before you're ready to observe it. :)
This is based on your current implementation. Note though that if files keep getting created, the message will be displayed over and over. If they are created fast enough, new messages will be displayed before the user can dismiss the previously-displayed one(s). You may prefer to modify your code to prevent this. E.g. unsubscribe from the event after you've already exceeded the max count, or at least temporarily inhibit the display of the message while one such message is already being displayed. Exactly what to do is up to you, and beyond the scope of your question and thus the scope of this answer.

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

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

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

ManualResetEvent wait doesn't release after being set

I'm downloading two JSON files from the webs, after which I want to allow loading two pages, but not before. However, the ManualResetEvent that is required to be set in order to load the page never "fires". Even though I know that it gets set, WaitOne never returns.
Method that launches the downloads:
private void Application_Launching(object sender, LaunchingEventArgs e)
{
PhoneApplicationService.Current.State["doneList"] = new List<int>();
PhoneApplicationService.Current.State["manualResetEvent"] = new ManualResetEvent(false);
Helpers.DownloadAndStoreJsonObject<ArticleList>("http://arkad.tlth.se/api/get_posts/", "articleList");
Helpers.DownloadAndStoreJsonObject<CompanyList>("http://arkad.tlth.se/api/get_posts/?postType=webbkatalog", "catalog");
}
The downloading method, that sets the ManualResetEvent
public static void DownloadAndStoreJsonObject<T>(string url, string objName)
{
var webClient = new WebClient();
webClient.DownloadStringCompleted += (sender, e) =>
{
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(e.Result))
{
var obj = ProcessJson<T>(e.Result);
PhoneApplicationService.Current.State[objName] = obj;
var doneList = PhoneApplicationService.Current.State["doneList"] as List<int>;
doneList.Add(0);
if (doneList.Count == 2) // Two items loaded
{
(PhoneApplicationService.Current.State["manualResetEvent"] as ManualResetEvent).Set(); // Signal that it's done
}
}
};
webClient.DownloadStringAsync(new Uri(url));
}
The waiting method (constructor in this case)
public SenastePage()
{
InitializeComponent();
if ((PhoneApplicationService.Current.State["doneList"] as List<int>).Count < 2)
{
(PhoneApplicationService.Current.State["manualResetEvent"] as ManualResetEvent).WaitOne();
}
SenasteArticleList.ItemsSource = (PhoneApplicationService.Current.State["articleList"] as ArticleList).posts;
}
If I wait before trying to access that constructor, it easily passes the if-statement and doesn't get caught in the WaitOne, but if I call it immediately, I get stuck, and it never returns...
Any ideas?

Blocking the UI thread must be prevented at all costs. Especially when downloading data: don't forget that your application is executing on a phone, which has a very instable network. If the data takes two minutes to load, then the UI will be freezed for two minutes. It would be an awful user experience.
There's many ways to prevent that. For instance, you can keep the same logic but waiting in a background thread instead of the UI thread:
public SenastePage()
{
// Write the XAML of your page to display the loading animation per default
InitializeComponent();
Task.Factory.StartNew(LoadData);
}
private void LoadData()
{
((ManualResetEvent)PhoneApplicationService.Current.State["manualResetEvent"]).WaitOne();
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(() =>
{
SenasteArticleList.ItemsSource = ((ArticleList)PhoneApplicationService.Current.State["articleList"]).posts;
// Hide the loading animation
}
}
That's just a quick and dirty way to reach the result you want. You could also rewrite your code using tasks, and using Task.WhenAll to trigger an action when they're all finished.

Perhaps there is a logic problem. In the SenastePage() constructor you are waiting for the set event only if the doneList count is less than two. However, you don't fire the set event until the doneList count is equal to two. You are listening for the set event before it can ever fire.

How to update UI from another thread running in another class

I am currently writing my first program on C# and I am extremely new to the language (used to only work with C so far). I have done a lot of research, but all answers were too general and I simply couldn't get it t work.
So here my (very common) problem:
I have a WPF application which takes inputs from a few textboxes filled by the user and then uses that to do a lot of calculations with them. They should take around 2-3 minutes, so I would like to update a progress bar and a textblock telling me what the current status is.
Also I need to store the UI inputs from the user and give them to the thread, so I have a third class, which I use to create an object and would like to pass this object to the background thread.
Obviously I would run the calculations in another thread, so the UI doesn't freeze, but I don't know how to update the UI, since all the calculation methods are part of another class.
After a lot of reasearch I think the best method to go with would be using dispatchers and TPL and not a backgroundworker, but honestly I am not sure how they work and after around 20 hours of trial and error with other answers, I decided to ask a question myself.
Here a very simple structure of my program:
public partial class MainWindow : Window
{
public MainWindow()
{
Initialize Component();
}
private void startCalc(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
inputValues input = new inputValues();
calcClass calculations = new calcClass();
try
{
input.pota = Convert.ToDouble(aVar.Text);
input.potb = Convert.ToDouble(bVar.Text);
input.potc = Convert.ToDouble(cVar.Text);
input.potd = Convert.ToDouble(dVar.Text);
input.potf = Convert.ToDouble(fVar.Text);
input.potA = Convert.ToDouble(AVar.Text);
input.potB = Convert.ToDouble(BVar.Text);
input.initStart = Convert.ToDouble(initStart.Text);
input.initEnd = Convert.ToDouble(initEnd.Text);
input.inita = Convert.ToDouble(inita.Text);
input.initb = Convert.ToDouble(initb.Text);
input.initc = Convert.ToDouble(initb.Text);
}
catch
{
MessageBox.Show("Some input values are not of the expected Type.", "Wrong Input", MessageBoxButton.OK, MessageBoxImage.Error);
}
Thread calcthread = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart(calculations.testMethod);
calcthread.Start(input);
}
public class inputValues
{
public double pota, potb, potc, potd, potf, potA, potB;
public double initStart, initEnd, inita, initb, initc;
}
public class calcClass
{
public void testmethod(inputValues input)
{
Thread.CurrentThread.Priority = ThreadPriority.Lowest;
int i;
//the input object will be used somehow, but that doesn't matter for my problem
for (i = 0; i < 1000; i++)
{
Thread.Sleep(10);
}
}
}
I would be very grateful if someone had a simple explanation how to update the UI from inside the testmethod. Since I am new to C# and object oriented programming, too complicated answers I will very likely not understand, I'll do my best though.
Also if someone has a better idea in general (maybe using backgroundworker or anything else) I am open to see it.

First you need to use Dispatcher.Invoke to change the UI from another thread and to do that from another class, you can use events.
Then you can register to that event(s) in the main class and Dispatch the changes to the UI and in the calculation class you throw the event when you want to notify the UI:
class MainWindow : Window
{
private void startCalc()
{
//your code
CalcClass calc = new CalcClass();
calc.ProgressUpdate += (s, e) => {
Dispatcher.Invoke((Action)delegate() { /* update UI */ });
};
Thread calcthread = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart(calc.testMethod));
calcthread.Start(input);
}
}
class CalcClass
{
public event EventHandler ProgressUpdate;
public void testMethod(object input)
{
//part 1
if(ProgressUpdate != null)
ProgressUpdate(this, new YourEventArgs(status));
//part 2
}
}
UPDATE:
As it seems this is still an often visited question and answer I want to update this answer with how I would do it now (with .NET 4.5) - this is a little longer as I will show some different possibilities:
class MainWindow : Window
{
Task calcTask = null;
void buttonStartCalc_Clicked(object sender, EventArgs e) { StartCalc(); } // #1
async void buttonDoCalc_Clicked(object sender, EventArgs e) // #2
{
await CalcAsync(); // #2
}
void StartCalc()
{
var calc = PrepareCalc();
calcTask = Task.Run(() => calc.TestMethod(input)); // #3
}
Task CalcAsync()
{
var calc = PrepareCalc();
return Task.Run(() => calc.TestMethod(input)); // #4
}
CalcClass PrepareCalc()
{
//your code
var calc = new CalcClass();
calc.ProgressUpdate += (s, e) => Dispatcher.Invoke((Action)delegate()
{
// update UI
});
return calc;
}
}
class CalcClass
{
public event EventHandler<EventArgs<YourStatus>> ProgressUpdate; // #5
public TestMethod(InputValues input)
{
//part 1
ProgressUpdate.Raise(this, status); // #6 - status is of type YourStatus
// alternative version to the extension for C# 6+:
ProgressUpdate?.Invoke(this, new EventArgs<YourStatus>(status));
//part 2
}
}
static class EventExtensions
{
public static void Raise<T>(this EventHandler<EventArgs<T>> theEvent,
object sender, T args)
{
if (theEvent != null)
theEvent(sender, new EventArgs<T>(args));
}
}
#1) How to start the "synchronous" calculations and run them in the background
#2) How to start it "asynchronous" and "await it": Here the calculation is executed and completed before the method returns, but because of the async/await the UI is not blocked (BTW: such event handlers are the only valid usages of async void as the event handler must return void - use async Task in all other cases)
#3) Instead of a new Thread we now use a Task. To later be able to check its (successfull) completion we save it in the global calcTask member. In the background this also starts a new thread and runs the action there, but it is much easier to handle and has some other benefits.
#4) Here we also start the action, but this time we return the task, so the "async event handler" can "await it". We could also create async Task CalcAsync() and then await Task.Run(() => calc.TestMethod(input)).ConfigureAwait(false); (FYI: the ConfigureAwait(false) is to avoid deadlocks, you should read up on this if you use async/await as it would be to much to explain here) which would result in the same workflow, but as the Task.Run is the only "awaitable operation" and is the last one we can simply return the task and save one context switch, which saves some execution time.
#5) Here I now use a "strongly typed generic event" so we can pass and receive our "status object" easily
#6) Here I use the extension defined below, which (aside from ease of use) solve the possible race condition in the old example. There it could have happened that the event got null after the if-check, but before the call if the event handler was removed in another thread at just that moment. This can't happen here, as the extensions gets a "copy" of the event delegate and in the same situation the handler is still registered inside the Raise method.

I am going to throw you a curve ball here. If I have said it once I have said it a hundred times. Marshaling operations like Invoke or BeginInvoke are not always the best methods for updating the UI with worker thread progress.
In this case it usually works better to have the worker thread publish its progress information to a shared data structure that the UI thread then polls at regular intervals. This has several advantages.
It breaks the tight coupling between the UI and worker thread that Invoke imposes.
The UI thread gets to dictate when the UI controls get updated...the way it should be anyway when you really think about it.
There is no risk of overrunning the UI message queue as would be the case if BeginInvoke were used from the worker thread.
The worker thread does not have to wait for a response from the UI thread as would be the case with Invoke.
You get more throughput on both the UI and worker threads.
Invoke and BeginInvoke are expensive operations.
So in your calcClass create a data structure that will hold the progress information.
public class calcClass
{
private double percentComplete = 0;
public double PercentComplete
{
get
{
// Do a thread-safe read here.
return Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref percentComplete, 0, 0);
}
}
public testMethod(object input)
{
int count = 1000;
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++)
{
Thread.Sleep(10);
double newvalue = ((double)i + 1) / (double)count;
Interlocked.Exchange(ref percentComplete, newvalue);
}
}
}
Then in your MainWindow class use a DispatcherTimer to periodically poll the progress information. Configure the DispatcherTimer to raise the Tick event on whatever interval is most appropriate for your situation.
public partial class MainWindow : Window
{
public void YourDispatcherTimer_Tick(object sender, EventArgs args)
{
YourProgressBar.Value = calculation.PercentComplete;
}
}

You're right that you should use the Dispatcher to update controls on the UI thread, and also right that long-running processes should not run on the UI thread. Even if you run the long-running process asynchronously on the UI thread, it can still cause performance issues.
It should be noted that Dispatcher.CurrentDispatcher will return the dispatcher for the current thread, not necessarily the UI thread. I think you can use Application.Current.Dispatcher to get a reference to the UI thread's dispatcher if that's available to you, but if not you'll have to pass the UI dispatcher in to your background thread.
Typically I use the Task Parallel Library for threading operations instead of a BackgroundWorker. I just find it easier to use.
For example,
Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
SomeObject.RunLongProcess(someDataObject));
where
void RunLongProcess(SomeViewModel someDataObject)
{
for (int i = 0; i <= 1000; i++)
{
Thread.Sleep(10);
// Update every 10 executions
if (i % 10 == 0)
{
// Send message to UI thread
Application.Current.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(
DispatcherPriority.Normal,
(Action)(() => someDataObject.ProgressValue = (i / 1000)));
}
}
}

Everything that interacts with the UI must be called in the UI thread (unless it is a frozen object). To do that, you can use the dispatcher.
var disp = /* Get the UI dispatcher, each WPF object has a dispatcher which you can query*/
disp.BeginInvoke(DispatcherPriority.Normal,
(Action)(() => /*Do your UI Stuff here*/));
I use BeginInvoke here, usually a backgroundworker doesn't need to wait that the UI updates. If you want to wait, you can use Invoke. But you should be careful not to call BeginInvoke to fast to often, this can get really nasty.
By the way, The BackgroundWorker class helps with this kind of taks. It allows Reporting changes, like a percentage and dispatches this automatically from the Background thread into the ui thread. For the most thread <> update ui tasks the BackgroundWorker is a great tool.

If this is a long calculation then I would go background worker. It has progress support. It also has support for cancel.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc221403(v=VS.95).aspx
Here I have a TextBox bound to contents.
private void backgroundWorker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
Debug.Write("backgroundWorker_RunWorkerCompleted");
if (e.Cancelled)
{
contents = "Cancelled get contents.";
NotifyPropertyChanged("Contents");
}
else if (e.Error != null)
{
contents = "An Error Occured in get contents";
NotifyPropertyChanged("Contents");
}
else
{
contents = (string)e.Result;
if (contentTabSelectd) NotifyPropertyChanged("Contents");
}
}

You are going to have to come back to your main thread (also called UI thread) in order to update the UI.
Any other thread trying to update your UI will just cause exceptions to be thrown all over the place.
So because you are in WPF, you can use the Dispatcher and more specifically a beginInvoke on this dispatcher. This will allow you to execute what needs done (typically Update the UI) in the UI thread.
You migh also want to "register" the UI in your business, by maintaining a reference to a control/form, so you can use its dispatcher.

Thank God, Microsoft got that figured out in WPF :)
Every Control, like a progress bar, button, form, etc. has a Dispatcher on it. You can give the Dispatcher an Action that needs to be performed, and it will automatically call it on the correct thread (an Action is like a function delegate).
You can find an example here.
Of course, you'll have to have the control accessible from other classes, e.g. by making it public and handing a reference to the Window to your other class, or maybe by passing a reference only to the progress bar.

Felt the need to add this better answer, as nothing except BackgroundWorker seemed to help me, and the answer dealing with that thus far was woefully incomplete. This is how you would update a XAML page called MainWindow that has an Image tag like this:
<Image Name="imgNtwkInd" Source="Images/network_on.jpg" Width="50" />
with a BackgroundWorker process to show if you are connected to the network or not:
using System.ComponentModel;
using System.Windows;
using System.Windows.Controls;
public partial class MainWindow : Window
{
private BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
public MainWindow()
{
InitializeComponent();
// Set up background worker to allow progress reporting and cancellation
bw.WorkerReportsProgress = true;
bw.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
// This is your main work process that records progress
bw.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(SomeClass.DoWork);
// This will update your page based on that progress
bw.ProgressChanged += new ProgressChangedEventHandler(bw_ProgressChanged);
// This starts your background worker and "DoWork()"
bw.RunWorkerAsync();
// When this page closes, this will run and cancel your background worker
this.Closing += new CancelEventHandler(Page_Unload);
}
private void bw_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
BitmapImage bImg = new BitmapImage();
bool connected = false;
string response = e.ProgressPercentage.ToString(); // will either be 1 or 0 for true/false -- this is the result recorded in DoWork()
if (response == "1")
connected = true;
// Do something with the result we got
if (!connected)
{
bImg.BeginInit();
bImg.UriSource = new Uri("Images/network_off.jpg", UriKind.Relative);
bImg.EndInit();
imgNtwkInd.Source = bImg;
}
else
{
bImg.BeginInit();
bImg.UriSource = new Uri("Images/network_on.jpg", UriKind.Relative);
bImg.EndInit();
imgNtwkInd.Source = bImg;
}
}
private void Page_Unload(object sender, CancelEventArgs e)
{
bw.CancelAsync(); // stops the background worker when unloading the page
}
}
public class SomeClass
{
public static bool connected = false;
public void DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker bw = sender as BackgroundWorker;
int i = 0;
do
{
connected = CheckConn(); // do some task and get the result
if (bw.CancellationPending == true)
{
e.Cancel = true;
break;
}
else
{
Thread.Sleep(1000);
// Record your result here
if (connected)
bw.ReportProgress(1);
else
bw.ReportProgress(0);
}
}
while (i == 0);
}
private static bool CheckConn()
{
bool conn = false;
Ping png = new Ping();
string host = "SomeComputerNameHere";
try
{
PingReply pngReply = png.Send(host);
if (pngReply.Status == IPStatus.Success)
conn = true;
}
catch (PingException ex)
{
// write exception to log
}
return conn;
}
}
For more information: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc221403(v=VS.95).aspx

Telling the timer object to invoke its "Elapsed" event asynchronously

There are times in my application, when I need to invoke my timer manually.
I've tried the following:
int originalInterval = t.Interval;
t.Interval = 0;
t.Interval = originalInterval;
but it wasn't consistent.
I've created a new timer, inheriting from System.Timers.Timer, and exposed a "Tick" method - but the problem was that the "Elapsed" event then fired synchronously.
When I implemented the "Tick" with a new Thread - the results were, again, not consistent.
Is there a better way to implement it?

I once had the same problem, so I used the AutoResetEvent to know if the Elapsed was invoked successfully:
/// <summary>
/// Tickable timer, allows you to manually raise a 'Tick' (asynchronously, of course)
/// </summary>
public class TickableTimer : System.Timers.Timer
{
public new event ElapsedEventHandler Elapsed;
private System.Threading.AutoResetEvent m_autoResetEvent = new System.Threading.AutoResetEvent(true);
public TickableTimer()
: this(100)
{
}
public TickableTimer(double interval)
: base(interval)
{
base.Elapsed += new ElapsedEventHandler(TickableTimer_Elapsed);
}
public void Tick()
{
new System.Threading.Thread(delegate(object sender)
{
Dictionary<string, object> args = new Dictionary<string, object>
{
{"signalTime", DateTime.Now},
};
TickableTimer_Elapsed(this, Mock.Create<ElapsedEventArgs>(args));
}).Start();
this.m_autoResetEvent.WaitOne();
}
void TickableTimer_Elapsed(object sender, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
m_autoResetEvent.Set();
if (this.Elapsed != null)
this.Elapsed(sender, e);
}
}

It feels like you should look at your design a bit. Typically I try to avoid having the event handler method contain the actual work being done, but I rather try to let it be just a trigger, calling some other method that performs the work. That way you can invoke that other method from anywhere else as well:
private void Timer_Tick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
new Thread(MethodThatDoesTheWork).Start();
}
private void MethodThatDoesTheWork()
{
// actual work goes here
}
Now, you can invoke MethodThatDoesTheWork from anywhere else within the class (either synchronously or asynchronously using a separate thread).
Alternatively, if MethodThatDoesTheWork should always be an asynchronous call, you can spawn the thread inside that method instead:
private void MethodThatDoesTheWork()
{
new Thread(() =>
{
// work code goes here
}).Start();
}
In these samples I have manually created threads. You can use that approach, the ThreadPool, Task or whatever other method of calling code asychronously, whichever fits best in your context.

Normally you shouldn’t need to fire a timer manually — you can always just run the event itself in a new thread. By and large, that’s basically what the timer does, and since you want to fire it manually, you don’t need the timer (for that manual invocation).
You didn’t specify any details as to what you mean by “not consistent”. The following should normally work:
Thread thread = new Thread(myDelegate);
thread.Start();
Of course, myDelegate can be a lambda in case you need to pass parameters:
Thread thread = new Thread(() => myMethod(param1, param2));
thread.Start();