We Keep Coding

C# checking if an event delegate is null or not [duplicate]

In my .NET application I am subscribing to events from another class. The subscription is conditional. I am subscribing to events when the control is visible and de-subscribing it when it become invisible. However, in some conditions I do not want to de-subscribe the event even if the control is not visible as I want the result of an operation which is happening on a background thread.
Is there a way through which I can determine if a class has already subscribed to that event?
I know we can do it in the class which will raise that event by checking the event for null, but how do I do it in a class which will subscribe to that event?

The event keyword was explicitly invented to prevent you from doing what you want to do. It restricts access to the underlying delegate object so nobody can directly mess with the events handler subscriptions that it stores. Events are accessors for a delegate, just like a property is an accessor for a field. A property only permits get and set, an event only permits add and remove.
This keeps your code safe, other code can only remove an event handler if it knows the event handler method and the target object. The C# language puts an extra layer of security in place by not allowing you to name the target object.
And WinForms puts an extra layer of security in place so it becomes difficult even if you use Reflection. It stores delegate instances in an EventHandlerList with a secret "cookie" as the key, you'd have to know the cookie to dig the object out of the list.
Well, don't go there. It is trivial to solve your problem with a bit of code on your end:
private bool mSubscribed;
private void Subscribe(bool enabled)
{
if (!enabled) textBox1.VisibleChanged -= textBox1_VisibleChanged;
else if (!mSubscribed) textBox1.VisibleChanged += textBox1_VisibleChanged;
mSubscribed = enabled;
}

Assuming that you have no access to the innards of the class declaring the event, you have no way to do it directly. Events only expose operators += and -=, nothing else. You will need a flag or some other mechanism in your subscribing class to know whether you are already subscribed or not.

/// <summary>
/// Determine if a control has the event visible subscribed to
/// </summary>
/// <param name="controlObject">The control to look for the VisibleChanged event</param>
/// <returns>True if the control is subscribed to a VisibleChanged event, False otherwise</returns>
private bool IsSubscribed(Control controlObject)
{
FieldInfo event_visible_field_info = typeof(Control).GetField("EventVisible",
BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.NonPublic);
object object_value = event_visible_field_info.GetValue(controlObject);
PropertyInfo events_property_info = controlObject.GetType().GetProperty("Events",
BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance);
EventHandlerList event_list = (EventHandlerList)events_property_info.GetValue(controlObject, null);
return (event_list[object_value] != null);
}

Simply check whether the control is visible or not whenever the event handler is triggered.

Can you put the decision making logic into the method that fires the event? Assuming you're using Winforms it'd look something like this:
if (MyEvent != null && isCriteriaFulfilled)
{
MyEvent();
}
Where isCriteriaFulfilled is determined by your visible/invisible logic.
// UPDATES /////
Further to your 1st comment would it not make sense to alter the behaviour inside your event handler depending on the value of this.Visible?
a.Delegate += new Delegate(method1);
...
private void method1()
{
if (this.Visible)
// Do Stuff
}
Or if you really have to go with subscribing and unsubscribing:
private Delegate _method1 = null;
...
if(this.visible)
{
if (_method1 == null)
_method1 = new Delegate(method1);
a.Delegate += _method1;
}
else if (_method1 != null)
{
a.Delegate -= _method1;
}

using System;
//...
public event EventHandler Event;
public bool IsSubscribed(EventHandler Delegate)
{
if (Event == null)
{
return false;
}
var InvocationList = Event.GetInvocationList();
foreach (var Entry in InvocationList)
{
if (Entry.Equals(Delegate))
{
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
After 12 years it is here, works for me.

Can't you just remember whether you already subscribed? That approach worked fine for me so far. Even if you have a lot of events or objects, you may still want to just remember that (in a dictionary, for example).
On the other hand, visibility change was, at least for me, not a good point to subscribe/unsubscribe. I typically rather go with construction / Disposed, which are more clear than each time visibility changes.

I'm just expanding on Hans' answer. I'm just trying to ensure that I'm not installing my handler more than once, and not removing it when I still need it. This doesn't protect from a malicious or malfeasant caller unsubscribing repeatedly, for that you'd need to track the callers, and that would just open you up to having repeated subscriptions overrun the tracking mechanism.
// Tracks how many times the ReflectionOnlyResolveHandler has been requested.
private static int _subscribers = 0;
/// <summary>
/// Register or unregister the ReflectionOnlyResolveHandler.
/// </summary>
/// <param name="enable"></param>
public static void SubscribeReflectionOnlyResolve(bool enable)
{
lock(_lock)
{
if (_subscribers > 0 && !enable) _subscribers -= 1;
else if (enable) _subscribers += 1;
if (enable && _subscribers == 1)
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.ReflectionOnlyAssemblyResolve += ReflectionHelper.ReflectionOnlyResolveHandler;
else if (_subscribers == 0)
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.ReflectionOnlyAssemblyResolve -= ReflectionHelper.ReflectionOnlyResolveHandler;
}
}

C# Events / Block when hit GUI

I'm working on a custom GUI with SharpDX.
I have user Input from a Form Object and assign Action Methods to the specific events. Below my UI I have a "drawing canvas" and I use Tool Objects that also listen to those Form Events.
But I'm a bit stuck on the matter of how to design my program to only pass those events to a second layer (in this case my canvas) when the first layer did not "hit" anything. In short: Only call "Tool.OnMouseDown" when "Button.OnMouseDown" did return false? Would a Chain Of Responsibility be the/a correct or possible approach?
Or shall I make the current Tool check if "Excecute (Vector2)" is above some gui element but I think this would lead to the kind of coupling I want to prevent.
Hope someone is willing to help/hint (sorry for no code examples, if it's to confusingly descriped please tell me ;))
Thanks!
(Disclaimer: I know I don't have to reinvent the wheel, but I use it partly to learn and improve on my design patterns and coding skills)
thanks to sharp-ninja's answer i did the following:
ok working with it like this now :) thanks again Mister Ninja
using System.Windows.Forms;
public class HandleMouseEventArgs : MouseEventArgs
{
public bool handled { get; protected set; }
public HandleMouseEventArgs(MouseEventArgs args) : base(args.Button, args.Clicks, args.X, args.Y, args.Delta)
{
handled = false;
}
public void SetHandled()
{
handled = true;
}
}

Fortunately in .Net events get called in the order in which they are registered. You can use a handlable event arg so that the first handler of the event can tell subsequent event handlers whether the event was handled.
event EventHandler<MyHandlableEventArg> MultiLevelEvent;
Then in your main program:
// First event handler
MultiLevelEvent += (s, e) => { if(x) e.Handled = true; };
// Subsequent event handler
MultiLevelEvent += (s, e) => { if(!e.Handled) { /* Do Work */ } };

Temporarily stop form events from either being raised or being handled?

I have a ton on controls on a form, and there is a specific time when I want to stop all of my events from being handled for the time being. Usually I just do something like this if I don't want certain events handled:
private bool myOpRunning = false;
private void OpFunction()
{
myOpRunning = true;
// do stuff
myOpRunning = false;
}
private void someHandler(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (myOpRunning) return;
// otherwise, do things
}
But I have A LOT of handlers I need to update. Just curious if .NET has a quicker way than having to update each handler method.

You will have to create your own mechanism to do this. It's not too bad though. Consider adding another layer of abstraction. For example, a simple class called FilteredEventHandler that checks the state of myOpRunning and either calls the real event handler, or suppresses the event. The class would look something like this:
public sealed class FilteredEventHandler
{
private readonly Func<bool> supressEvent;
private readonly EventHandler realEvent;
public FilteredEventHandler(Func<bool> supressEvent, EventHandler eventToRaise)
{
this.supressEvent = supressEvent;
this.realEvent = eventToRaise;
}
//Checks the "supress" flag and either call the real event handler, or skip it
public void FakeEventHandler(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (!this.supressEvent())
{
this.realEvent(sender, e);
}
}
}
Then when you hook up the event, do this:
this.Control.WhateverEvent += new FilteredEventHandler(() => myOpRunning, RealEventHandler).FakeEventHandler;
When WhateverEvent gets raised, it will call the FilteredEventHandler.FakeEventHandler method. That method will check the flag and either call, or not call the real event handler. This is pretty much logically the same as what you're already doing, but the code that checks the myOpRunning flag is in only one place instead of sprinkled all over your code.
Edit to answer question in the comments:
Now, this example is a bit incomplete. It's a little difficult to unsubscribe from the event completely because you lose the reference to the FilteredEventHandler that's hooked up. For example, you can't do:
this.Control.WhateverEvent += new FilteredEventHandler(() => myOpRunning, RealEventHandler).FakeEventHandler;
//Some other stuff. . .
this.Control.WhateverEvent -= new FilteredEventHandler(() => myOpRunning, RealEventHandler).FakeEventHandler; //Not gonna work!
because you're hooking up one delegate and unhooking a completely different one! Granted, both delegates are the FakeEventHandler method, but that's an instance method and they belong to two completely different FilteredEventHandler objects.
Somehow, you need to get a reference to the first FilteredEventHandler that you constructed in order to unhook. Something like this would work, but it involves keeping track of a bunch of FilteredEventHandler objects which is probably no better than the original problem you're trying to solve:
FilteredEventHandler filter1 = new FilteredEventHandler(() => myOpRunning, RealEventHandler);
this.Control.WhateverEvent += filter1.FakeEventHandler;
//Code that does other stuff. . .
this.Control.WhateverEvent -= filter1.FakeEventHandler;
What I would do, in this case, is to have the FilteredEventHandler.FakeEventHandler method pass its 'this' reference to the RealEventHandler. This involves changing the signature of the RealEventHandler to either take another parameter:
public void RealEventHandler(object sender, EventArgs e, FilteredEventHandler filter);
or changing it to take an EventArgs subclass that you create that holds a reference to the FilteredEventHandler. This is the better way to do it
public void RealEventHandler(object sender, FilteredEventArgs e);
//Also change the signature of the FilteredEventHandler constructor:
public FilteredEventHandler(Func<bool> supressEvent, EventHandler<FilteredEventArgs> eventToRaise)
{
//. . .
}
//Finally, change the FakeEventHandler method to call the real event and pass a reference to itself
this.realEvent(sender, new FilteredEventArgs(e, this)); //Pass the original event args + a reference to this specific FilteredEventHandler
Now the RealEventHandler that gets called can unsubscribe itself because it has a reference to the correct FilteredEventHandler object that got passed in to its parameters.
My final advice, though is to not do any of this! Neolisk nailed it in the comments. Doing something complicated like this is a sign that there's a problem with the design. It will be difficult for anybody who needs to maintain this code in the future (even you, suprisingly!) to figure out the non-standard plumbing involved.
Usually when you're subscribing to events, you do it once and forget it - especially in a GUI program.

You can do it with reflection ...
public static void UnregisterAllEvents(object objectWithEvents)
{
Type theType = objectWithEvents.GetType();
//Even though the events are public, the FieldInfo associated with them is private
foreach (System.Reflection.FieldInfo field in theType.GetFields(System.Reflection.BindingFlags.NonPublic | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Instance))
{
//eventInfo will be null if this is a normal field and not an event.
System.Reflection.EventInfo eventInfo = theType.GetEvent(field.Name);
if (eventInfo != null)
{
MulticastDelegate multicastDelegate = field.GetValue(objectWithEvents) as MulticastDelegate;
if (multicastDelegate != null)
{
foreach (Delegate _delegate in multicastDelegate.GetInvocationList())
{
eventInfo.RemoveEventHandler(objectWithEvents, _delegate);
}
}
}
}
}

You could just disable the container where all these controls are put in. For example, if you put them in a GroupBox or Panel simply use: groupbox.Enabled = false; or panel.Enabled = false;. You could also disable the form From1.Enabled = false; and show a wait cursor. You can still copy and paste these controls in a container other than the form.

Code improvement: Better alternatives to this pattern?

In a similar question:
What is this pattern called? Soft Lock?
I was asking about the name of the pattern for the code listing below.
public class MyClass
{
public event EventHandler MyEvent;
private bool IsHandlingEvent = false;
public MyClass()
{
MyEvent += new EventHandler(MyClass_MyEvent);
}
void MyClass_MyEvent(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (IsHandlingEvent) { return; }
IsHandlingEvent = true;
{
// Code goes here that handles the event, possibly invoking 'MyEvent' again.
// IsHandlingEvent flag is used to avoid redundant processing. What is this
// technique, or pattern called.
// ...
}
IsHandlingEvent = false;
}
}
It seems that most of the conversation was centered around why we should an should not do this, so I think that this question provides a better forum to tackle the problem and address all of the issues. What is the better / proper way to handle this?

There are series of problems with that pattern. If you want to invoke the handler only once, you would do something like this:
protected static object _lockObj = new object();
protected static bool _isHandled = false;
void MyClass_MyEvent(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if(_isHandled)
return;
lock(_lockObj)
{
if(_isHandled)
return;
_isHandled = true;
MyOtherPossiblyRecursiveMethod(); // Actually does all your work
_isHandled = false;
}
}
void MyOtherPossiblyRecursiveMethod()
{
}
This way, only one thread should be able to access the actual work method.

I will use something like:
using( var sl = new SoftLock() )
{
sl.Execute(()=>{....});
}
the execute will raise the internal boolean to prevent re-entering. In the dispose that flag would be resetted. Execute will call the lambda just if the flag is false. This is to ensure flag go to false even if exception happens ( causing handler never executed ) and maybe is a little better to see. Of course this is not thread safe, as the original code, but this because we are talking about preventing double execution from the same thread.

The original code is a sufficient (and very lightweight) way to prevent recursion in a single-threaded app. So if during your event handling function you could get into code that might be firing the event again you will not enter infinite recursion.
But the code is not sufficient to prevent access from multiple threads, due to the potential for race conditions. If you need to ensure only one thread gets to run this event, then you should use a stronger locking mechanism, like a Mutex or Semaphore.

The following works in single- and multi-threaded scenarios and is exception-safe... also if need be it can be modified to allow for a certain level of reentrancy (for example 3 levels)...
public class MyClass
{
public event EventHandler MyEvent;
private int IsHandlingEvent = 0;
public MyClass()
{
MyEvent += new EventHandler(MyClass_MyEvent);
}
void MyClass_MyEvent(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// this allows for nesting if needed by comparing for example < 3 or similar
if (Interlocked.Increment (ref IsHandlingEvent) == 1 )
{
try {
}
finally {};
}
Interlocked.Decrement (ref IsHandlingEvent);
}
}

How events like CancelEventArgs can be used?

How can the event System.ComponentModel.CancelEventArgs be used? Suppose we have the following code:
public event CancelEventHandler EventTest = delegate { };
public void MakeSomethingThatRaisesEvent()
{
CancelEventArgs cea = new CancelEventArgs();
EventTest(this, cea);
if (cea.Cancel)
{
// Do something
}
else
{
// Do something else
}
}
What happens if more than one delegate is registered on the event? There is any way to get the results of all the subscribers?
This is used on Winforms (at least) sometimes. If not possible to get all values, they suppose only one subscriber to the event?

To ask each subscriber separately, you need to access the list:
foreach (CancelEventHandler subHandler in handler.GetInvocationList())
{
// treat individually
}
Then you can check each in turn; otherwise you just get the final vote.

Normally, in most cases, the class just allows multiple subscribers, but each gets the same instance of CancelEventArgs.
If any of the subscribers set Cancel to true, the operation will be treated as canceled.
You can work around this by getting the invocation list, and sending an event to each subscriber, but this is not usually necessary.