We Keep Coding

Update process from within method called by backgroundworker c#

I have an application with a gui and a Rich Text Box where I output what the program is currently doing since data processing can be quite long.
I tried two approaches for that:
1 In the Backgroundworker method I can just call the following code fine:
GlobalVar.backgroundWorkerAppendText = task.Build_CSV_List();
Processchange();
Whereas I cannot use Form1.Processchange(); in the helper class due to the non static context
2 Therefore I tried to create my very first eventhandler.
The Idea was that helper.UpdateConsole() would raise an event
public event EventHandler OnConsoleUpdate;
public void Consoleupdate()
{
OnConsoleUpdate(this, EventArgs.Empty);
}
to which the Backgroundworker listens and then calls Processchange from its context
public void BackgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
StandardTasks task = new StandardTasks();
Helper helper = new Helper();
helper.OnConsoleUpdate += Processchange;
task.DoSomeStuffHere()
}
public void Processchange(object sender=null, EventArgs e=null)
{
//MessageBox.Show(GlobalVar.backgroundWorkerAppendText);
GlobalVar.next = false;
backgroundWorker1.ReportProgress(1);
while (GlobalVar.next == false)
{
helper.TimeBreaker(100,"ms");
}
}
Unfortunately this was was not successful. As soon as rising the Event I get the errormessage System.NullReferenceException which -after googling- leads me to the conclusion that there is no listerner attached to the event eventhouh I attached it in the Backgroundworker Do work.
Edit: the OnConsoleUpdate() == null as shown on the screenshot below
event = null
The helper is in another class file "helpers" which might be important for a solution.
i hope you guys can help me out.

Welcome to SO!
A few things immediately jump to mind.
First, let's get the event issue out of the way. You've got the correct approach - you need an event and method to call it, but that method should check if the event is null.
Basically, do this:
public event EventHandler OnConsoleUpdate;
public void ConsoleUpdate()
{
OnConsoleUpdate?.Invoke(this, EventArgs.Empty);
}
The above makes use of ?, a null-condition operator. You can read more about it on this MSDN page.
Second thing... it's unclear what your background worker actually IS. It sounds like it's some kind of custom class you crated? The reason it's important is because .NET actually has a BackgroundWorker class used for running operations... well, in the background. It also has an OnProgressChanged event which you can hook up to which could be used to update the UI (just remember to set the WorkerReportsProgress property to true). And to use the BackgroundWorker mentioned above, you shouldn't need to create any events of your own.
Here's how you can use the standard .NET BackgroundWorker:
System.ComponentModel.BackgroundWorker worker = new System.ComponentModel.BackgroundWorker();
void StartBackgroundTask()
{
worker.DoWork += worker_DoWork;
//if it's possible to display progress, use this
worker.WorkerReportsProgress = true;
worker.ProgressChanged += worker_ProgressChanged;
//what to do when the method finishes?
worker.RunWorkerCompleted += worker_RunWorkerCompleted;
//start!
worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
void worker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, System.ComponentModel.RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
//perform any "finalization" operations, like re-enable disabled buttons
//display the result using the data in e.Result
//this code will be running in the UI thread
}
//example of a container class to pass more data in the ReportProgress event
public class ProgressData
{
public string OperationDescription { get; set; }
public int CurrentResult { get; set; }
//feel free to add more stuff here
}
void worker_ProgressChanged(object sender, System.ComponentModel.ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
//display the progress using e.ProgressPercentage or e.UserState
//this code will be running in the UI thread
//UserState can be ANYTHING:
//var data = (ProgressData)e.UserState;
}
void worker_DoWork(object sender, System.ComponentModel.DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
//this code will NOT be running in the UI thread!
//you should NOT call the UI thread from this method
int result = 1;
//perform calculations
for (var i = 1; i <= 10; i++)
{
worker.ReportProgress(i, new ProgressData(){ OperationDescription = "CustomState passed as second, optional parameter", CurrentResult = result });
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5));
result *= i;
}
e.Result = result;
}
Now, the thing about the BackgroundWorker class is that it is rather old, and with current .NET versions you can use the async / await keywords to easily handle background operations and UI updates, but this probably is going outside the bounds of this question. That said, the existence of async / await doesn't invalidate the use of BackgroundWorker which is pretty simple in its usage.
There's one more worrisome thing in your code.
public void BackgroundWorker1_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
StandardTasks task = new StandardTasks(); //<- you create a task
Helper helper = new Helper(); // <- you create a helper
helper.OnConsoleUpdate += Processchange; // <- you hook up to the helper event
task.DoSomeStuffHere(); // <- you do stuff with the task... but the task doesn't know about your helper above! Does `StandardTasks` use `Helper`? If so, how?
}
Do note that events, unless made static, aren't global. So hooking up to an event in one instance of a class won't cause another instance of that class to "fire" that event. It seems one way to fix your issues would be to make the StandardTasks class take Helper as one of the constructor parameters, so the code would look like this:
Helper helper = new Helper(); // <- you create a helper
helper.OnConsoleUpdate += Processchange; // <- you hook up to the helper class event to actually do something
StandardTasks task = new StandardTasks(helper); //<- you create a task which will use the helper with the hooked up event above

Passing results back to main thread from a cancelled BackgroundWorker thread

How can I cancel a backgroundworker and pass back an error message. I know that you can use DoWorkEventArgs e.Results to pass back results to main thread but e.Results gets overwritten when I cancel the child thread. Example:
private MyProgram_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
e.Cancel = true;
e.Result = "my error message";
return;
}
private void MyProgram_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if ((e.Cancelled == true))
{
string ErrorMsg = (string)e.Result; //exception happens here
....
}
else
{
// success code
}
}
Is there another way to stop my child thread and send a string back to the main thread?

If your long-running process was canceled, it wouldn't really have a "result", as the process didn't completely finish.
According to the documentation:
Your RunWorkerCompleted event handler should always check the Error and Cancelled properties before accessing the Result property. If an exception was raised or if the operation was canceled, accessing the Result property raises an exception.
I took a peek inside BackgroundWorker. Here's the contents of the Result property:
public object Result
{
get
{
this.RaiseExceptionIfNecessary();
return this.result;
}
}
And the contents of RaiseExceptionIfNecessary():
protected void RaiseExceptionIfNecessary()
{
if (this.Error != null)
throw new TargetInvocationException(SR.GetString("Async_ExceptionOccurred"), this.Error);
if (this.Cancelled)
throw new InvalidOperationException(SR.GetString("Async_OperationCancelled"));
}
So if you cancel the thread, referencing Result will throw an InvalidOperationException. That's just the way it's designed.
I don't know what the "best" way is to pass a string back. I'd say you could define a variable in the same method you run the BackgroundWorker from, and assign a value to it from the DoWork event.
You just have to be very careful that nothing on the UI thread is somehow bound to the variable or you could run into problems. A string should be safe, but don't start adding to a list that's bound to a ComboBox or something.

C# - How to work with background worker with custom code -Run,Pause,Stop?

I am working with Background Worker but neither i am able to synchronize my progress bar nor able to stop or abort the process.
in my dowork function
void bw_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
if(bw.CancellationPending==true)
{
e.cancel=true;
return;
}
else
{
e.Result = abc();
}
}
int abc()
{
//my work
Count++;
return count;
}
void bw_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if(bw.CancellationPending==true)
{
button17.Visibility = Visibility.Visible;
label1.Content = "Aborted";
}
button17.Visibility = Visibility.Visible;
label1.Content = "Completed";
}
private void Cancel_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
if(bw.IsBusy)
{
bw.CancelAsync();
}
}
Now i want to know how could i Synchronize my Progress Bar and how to exit from the process?

Have you set the BackgroundWorker.WorkerReportsProgress && BackgroundWorker.WorkerSupportsCancellation properties on your instance to be true?
e.g.
var myBackgroundWorker = new BackgroundWorker();
myBackgroundWorker.WorkerReportsProgress = true;
myBackgroundWorker.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
//the rest of the init
If you want to report progress, you need to call the BackgroundWorker.ReportProgress() method from inside your DoWork.

This is a rubbish and trivial answer but give the Task Parallel library a whirl.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd537608.aspx
This library encapsulates threads as discrete Task objects. It supports cancellation.
Be warned that in a worker thread, pause and cancellation operation have to be supported by the worker code itself, by polling pause/cancel flags and tokens. You cannot safely achieve these operations with threads alone.
It is a nicer pattern to work with
As for your question, 2 flags are required to support your operations. You will be need to check them at intervals during the worker code.
bool pause = false;
bool cancel = false;
void DoWork()
{
try
{
...
//periodically check the flags
if(cancel) return;
while(paused){}; //spin on pause
...
}
finally
{
//cleanup operation
}
}
Alastair Pitts' answer illustrates how background worker supports these features.
So does MSDN ;) http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc221403%28v=vs.95%29.aspx

(You might want to check out this other SO question/answer for details about the new async facility! It greatly improves the quality of life of developing this kind of operations!)
BackgroundWorker is event-based, basic usage is the following (the link provides many useful additional details):
var worker = new BackgroundWorker();
// The following two props must be true:
// #1: The worker will be enabled to signal its progress
worker.WorkerReportsProgress = true;
// #2: The worker will accept cancellation
worker.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
// Now the events:
worker.DoWork += (s,e) =>
{
int i = 0; // This goes from 0 to 100
// Do code, update 'i'
worker.ReportProgress(i);
worker.CancelAsync(); //... to cancel the worker if needed
// WARNING: This code *cannot* interact with the UI because
// it's running in a different thread
};
worker.ProgressChanged += (s,e)=>
{
// This is executed when you call ReportProgress() from DoWork() handler
// IMPORTANT: All UI interaction **must** happen here
// e.ProgressPercentage gives you the value of the parameter you passed to
// ReportProgress() (this mechanism is a perfect fit for a progress bar!)
};
worker.RunWorkerCompleted+= (s,e) =>
{
// code here runs when DoWork() is done, is canceled or throws.
// To check what happened, the link provides this sample code:
if (e.Cancelled == true)
{
// Cancelled!
}
else if (e.Error != null)
{
// Exception !
}
else
{
// Work completed!
}
};
worker.RunWorkerAsync();
It's important to know that (extracted from the link above):
You must be careful not to manipulate any user-interface objects in your DoWork event handler. Instead, communicate to the user interface through the ProgressChanged and RunWorkerCompleted events.
UPDATE Lambdas here are used to keep code compact. You can obviously use "normal" handlers or whatever other method of attaching code to events you like/want/need.

How to stop BackgroundWorker correctly

I have a form with 2 comboboxes on it. And I want to fill combobox2.DataSource based on combobox1.Text and combobox2.Text (I assume that the user has completed input in combobox1 and is in the middle of inputting in combobox2). So I have an event handler for combobox2 like this:
private void combobox2_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)
cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancelAsync();
var filledComboboxValues = new FilledComboboxValues{ V1 = combobox1.Text,
V2 = combobox2.Text};
cmbDataSourceExtractor.RunWorkerAsync(filledComboboxValues );
}
As far as building DataSource is time-consuming process (it creates a request to database and executes it) I decided that it's better to perform it in another process using BackgroundWorker. So there's a scenario when cmbDataSourceExtractor hasn't completed its work and the user types one more symbol. In this case I get an exception on this line
cmbDataSourceExtractor.RunWorkerAsync(filledComboboxValues ); about that BackgroundWorker is busy and cannot perform several actions in the same time.
How to get rid of this exception?

CancelAsync doesn't actually abort your thread or anything like that. It sends a message to the worker thread that work should be cancelled via BackgroundWorker.CancellationPending. Your DoWork delegate that is being run in the background must periodically check this property and handle the cancellation itself.
The tricky part is that your DoWork delegate is probably blocking, meaning that the work you do on your DataSource must complete before you can do anything else (like check for CancellationPending). You may need to move your actual work to yet another async delegate (or maybe better yet, submit the work to the ThreadPool), and have your main worker thread poll until this inner worker thread triggers a wait state, OR it detects CancellationPending.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.backgroundworker.cancelasync.aspx
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/cpp/BackgroundWorker_Threads.aspx

If you add a loop between the CancelAsync() and the RunWorkerAsync() like so it will solve your problem
private void combobox2_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)
cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancelAsync();
while(cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)
Application.DoEvents();
var filledComboboxValues = new FilledComboboxValues{ V1 = combobox1.Text,
V2 = combobox2.Text};
cmbDataSourceExtractor.RunWorkerAsync(filledComboboxValues );
}
The while loop with the call to Application.DoEvents() will hault the execution of your new worker thread until the current one has properly cancelled, keep in mind you still need to handle the cancellation of your worker thread. With something like:
private void cmbDataSourceExtractor_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
if (this.cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancellationPending)
{
e.Cancel = true;
return;
}
// do stuff...
}
The Application.DoEvents() in the first code snippet will continue to process your GUI threads message queue so the even to cancel and update the cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy property will still be processed (if you simply added a continue instead of Application.DoEvents() the loop would lock the GUI thread into a busy state and would not process the event to update the cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)

You will have to use a flag shared between the main thread and the BackgroundWorker, such as BackgroundWorker.CancellationPending. When you want the BackgroundWorker to exit, just set the flag using BackgroundWorker.CancelAsync().
MSDN has a sample: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.backgroundworker.cancellationpending.aspx

MY example . DoWork is below:
DoLengthyWork();
//this is never executed
if(bgWorker.CancellationPending)
{
MessageBox.Show("Up to here? ...");
e.Cancel = true;
}
inside DoLenghtyWork :
public void DoLenghtyWork()
{
OtherStuff();
for(int i=0 ; i<10000000; i++)
{ int j = i/3; }
}
inside OtherStuff() :
public void OtherStuff()
{
for(int i=0 ; i<10000000; i++)
{ int j = i/3; }
}
What you want to do is modify both DoLenghtyWork and OtherStuff() so that they become:
public void DoLenghtyWork()
{
if(!bgWorker.CancellationPending)
{
OtherStuff();
for(int i=0 ; i<10000000; i++)
{
int j = i/3;
}
}
}
public void OtherStuff()
{
if(!bgWorker.CancellationPending)
{
for(int i=0 ; i<10000000; i++)
{
int j = i/3;
}
}
}

The problem is caused by the fact that cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancelAsync() is an asynchronous method, the Cancel operation has not yet completed when cmdDataSourceExtractor.RunWorkerAsync(...) exitst. You should wait for cmdDataSourceExtractor to complete before calling RunWorkerAsync again. How to do this is explained in this SO question.

My answer is a bit different because I've tried these methods but they didn't work. My code uses an extra class that checks for a Boolean flag in a public static class as the database values are read or where I prefer it just before an object is added to a List object or something as such. See the change in the code below. I added the ThreadWatcher.StopThread property. for this explation I'm nog going to reinstate the current thread because it's not your issue but that's as easy as setting the property to false before accessing the next thread...
private void combobox2_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
//Stop the thread here with this
ThreadWatcher.StopThread = true;//the rest of this thread will run normally after the database function has stopped.
if (cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)
cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancelAsync();
while(cmbDataSourceExtractor.IsBusy)
Application.DoEvents();
var filledComboboxValues = new FilledComboboxValues{ V1 = combobox1.Text,
V2 = combobox2.Text};
cmbDataSourceExtractor.RunWorkerAsync(filledComboboxValues );
}
all fine
private void cmbDataSourceExtractor_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
if (this.cmbDataSourceExtractor.CancellationPending)
{
e.Cancel = true;
return;
}
// do stuff...
}
Now add the following class
public static class ThreadWatcher
{
public static bool StopThread { get; set; }
}
and in your class where you read the database
List<SomeObject>list = new List<SomeObject>();
...
if (!reader.IsDbNull(0))
something = reader.getString(0);
someobject = new someobject(something);
if (ThreadWatcher.StopThread == true)
break;
list.Add(something);
...
don't forget to use a finally block to properly close your database connection etc. Hope this helps! Please mark me up if you find it helpful.

In my case, I had to pool database for payment confirmation to come in and then update WPF UI.
Mechanism that spins up all the processes:
public void Execute(object parameter)
{
try
{
var url = string.Format("{0}New?transactionReference={1}", Settings.Default.PaymentUrlWebsite, "transactionRef");
Process.Start(new ProcessStartInfo(url));
ViewModel.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment = new BackgroundWorker {WorkerSupportsCancellation = true};
ViewModel.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.DoWork += ViewModel.updateUiWhenDoneWithPayment_DoWork;
ViewModel.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.RunWorkerCompleted += ViewModel.updateUiWhenDoneWithPayment_RunWorkerCompleted;
ViewModel.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.RunWorkerAsync();
}
catch (Exception e)
{
ViewModel.Log.Error("Failed to navigate to payments", e);
MessageBox.Show("Failed to navigate to payments");
}
}
Mechanism that does checking for completion:
private void updateUiWhenDoneWithPayment_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
Thread.Sleep(30000);
while (string.IsNullOrEmpty(GetAuthToken()) && !((BackgroundWorker)sender).CancellationPending)
{
Thread.Sleep(5000);
}
//Plug in pooling mechanism
this.AuthCode = GetAuthToken();
}
Mechanism that cancels if window gets closed:
private void PaymentView_OnUnloaded(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
var context = DataContext as PaymentViewModel;
if (context.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment != null && context.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.WorkerSupportsCancellation && context.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.IsBusy)
context.UpdateUiWhenDoneWithPayment.CancelAsync();
}

I agree with guys. But sometimes you have to add more things.
IE
1) Add this worker.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
2) Add to you class some method to do the following things
public void KillMe()
{
worker.CancelAsync();
worker.Dispose();
worker = null;
GC.Collect();
}
So before close your application your have to call this method.
3) Probably you can Dispose, null all variables and timers which are inside of the BackgroundWorker.

BackgroundWorkerThread access in a thread

I use BackgroundWorker most of the time in the win form apps to show progress as I'm getting data. I was under impression that Work_completed is guaranteed to be executed on Main UI thread but it's not. If we create a thread and call the worker.RunWorkerAsync within it, it breaks if we try to update any gui control. Here is an example
private void StartButton_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Thread thread1 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(PerformWorkerTask));
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
thread1.Start();
}
public void PerformWorkerTask()
{
_worker.DoWork += delegate
{
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
Thread.Sleep(100);
}
};
_worker.RunWorkerCompleted += delegate
{
// this throws exception
MessageLabel.Text = "Completed";
};
_worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
How can we make backgroundworker work in this case?

RunWorkerAsync does its thread-synchronization magic by getting the SynchronizationContext from the thread that it is called on. It then guarantees that the events will be executed on the correct thread according to the semantics of the SynchronizationContext it got. In the case of the WindowsFormsSynchronizationContext, which is what is automatically used if you're using WinForms, the events are synchronized by posting to the message queue of the thread that started the operation. Of course, this is all transparent to you until it breaks.
EDIT: You MUST call RunWorkerAsync from the UI thread for this to work. If you can't do it any other way, your best bet is to invoke the beginning of the operation on a control so that the worker is started on the UI thread:
private void RunWorker()
{
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
_worker.DoWork += delegate
{
// do work
};
_worker.RunWorkerCompleted += delegate
{
MessageLabel.Text = "Completed";
};
_worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
// ... some code that's executing on a non-UI thread ...
{
MessageLabel.Invoke(new Action(RunWorker));
}

From your example it's hard to see what good the Thread (thread1) is, but if you really do need this thread1 then I think your only option is to use MainForm.Invoke() to execute RunWorkerAsync() (or a small method around it) on the main thread.
Added: You can use something like this:
Action a = new Action(_worker.RunWorkerAsync);
this.Invoke(a);

It sounds like the issue is just that you want to make a change to a GUI component and you aren't actually sure if you're on the GUI thread. Dan posted a valid method of setting a GUI component property safely, but I find the following shortcut method the simplest:
MessageLabel.Invoke(
(MethodInvoker)delegate
{
MessageLabel.Text = "Hello World";
});
If there are any issues with this approach, I'd like to know about them!

In the code you have presented here, you're adding the delegates for the BackgroundWorker events in a separate thread from the UI thread.
Try adding the event handlers in the main UI thread, and you should be okay.

You could probably make your existing code work by doing:
this.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(() => MessageLabel.Text = "Completed")
instead of
MessageLabel.Text = "Completed"
You're probably having cross-thread data access issues, so you have to ensure that you access properties of MessageLabel on your UI thread. This is one way to do that. Some of the other suggestions are valid too. The question to ask yourself is: why are you creating a thread that does nothing other than create a BackgroundWorker thread? If there's a reason, then fine, but from what you've shown here there's no reason you couldn't create and start the BackgroundWorker thread from your event handler, in which case there would be no cross-thread access issue because the RunWorkerCompleted event handler will call its delegates on the UI thread.

I believe BackgroundWorker is designed to automatically utilize a new thread. Therefore creating a new thread just to call RunWorkerAsync is redundant. You are creating a thread just to create yet another thread. What's probably happening is this:
You create a new thread from thread 1 (the GUI thread); call this thread 2.
From thread 2, you launch RunWorkerAsync which itself creates yet another thread; call this thread 3.
The code for RunWorkerCompleted runs on thread 2, which is the thread that called RunWorkerAsync.
Since thread 2 is not the same as the GUI thread (thread 1), you get an illegal cross-thread call exception.
(The below suggestion uses VB instead of C# since that's what I'm more familiar with; I'm guessing you can figure out how to write the appropriate C# code to do the same thing.)
Get rid of the extraneous new thread; just declare _worker WithEvents, add handlers to _worker.DoWork and _worker.RunWorkerCompleted, and then call _worker.RunWorkerAsync instead of defining a custom PerformWorkerTask function.
EDIT: To update GUI controls in a thread-safe manner, use code like the following (more or less copied from this article from MSDN):
delegate void SetTextCallback(System.Windows.Forms.Control c, string t);
private void SafeSetText(System.Windows.Forms.Control c, string t)
{
if (c.InvokeRequired)
{
SetTextCallback d = new SetTextCallback(SafeSetText);
d.Invoke(d, new object[] { c, t });
}
else
{
c.Text = t;
}
}

The best way to deal with these generic problems is to deal it once. Here I'm posting a small class that wraps the backgroupdworker thread and makes sure that the workcompleted always gets executed on the UI thread.
using System.Windows.Forms;
namespace UI.Windows.Forms.Utilities.DataManagment
{
public class DataLoader
{
private BackgroundWorker _worker;
private DoWorkEventHandler _workDelegate;
private RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler _workCompleted;
private ExceptionHandlerDelegate _exceptionHandler;
public static readonly Control ControlInvoker = new Control();
public DoWorkEventHandler WorkDelegate
{
get { return _workDelegate; }
set { _workDelegate = value; }
}
public RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler WorkCompleted
{
get { return _workCompleted; }
set { _workCompleted = value; }
}
public ExceptionHandlerDelegate ExceptionHandler
{
get { return _exceptionHandler; }
set { _exceptionHandler = value; }
}
public void Execute()
{
if (WorkDelegate == null)
{
throw new Exception(
"WorkDelegage is not assinged any method to execute. Use WorkDelegate Property to assing the method to execute");
}
if (WorkCompleted == null)
{
throw new Exception(
"WorkCompleted is not assinged any method to execute. Use WorkCompleted Property to assing the method to execute");
}
SetupWorkerThread();
_worker.RunWorkerAsync();
}
private void SetupWorkerThread()
{
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
_worker.WorkerSupportsCancellation = true;
_worker.DoWork += WorkDelegate;
_worker.RunWorkerCompleted += worker_RunWorkerCompleted;
}
void worker_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if(e.Error !=null && ExceptionHandler != null)
{
ExceptionHandler(e.Error);
return;
}
ControlInvoker.Invoke(WorkCompleted, this, e);
}
}
}
And here is the usage. One thing to note is that it exposes a static property ControlInvoker that needs to be set only once (you should do it at the beginning of the app load)
Let's take the same example that I posted in question and re write it
DataLoader loader = new DataLoader();
loader.ControlInvoker.Parent = this; // needed to be set only once
private void StartButton_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Thread thread1 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(PerformWorkerTask));
_worker = new BackgroundWorker();
thread1.Start();
}
public void PerformWorkerTask()
{
loader.WorkDelegate = delegate {
// get any data you want
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
Thread.Sleep(100);
}
};
loader.WorkCompleted = delegate
{
// access any control you want
MessageLabel.Text = "Completed";
};
loader.Execute();
}
Cheers