Why can't method 1 be executed correctly, through Action <'string'> updateMsgAction, to add a message to the ListBox, but method 2 can be executed correctly?
I tried using method 3 BeginInvoke(Delegate, Object[])
, the compiler displays an error.
I want that method #2 can be like method #1 become a method to call when need update message.
Method 1: UpdateMsg using Action<string>
private Action<string> updateMsgAction;
public void UpdateMsg()
{
updateMsgAction = new Action<string>( (s) =>
{
MsgList.Items.Add(s);
if (MsgList.Items.Count > 1000)
{
MsgList.Items.RemoveAt(0);
}
});
}
Method 3: using BeginInvoke(Delegate, Object[])
public delegate void MyDelegate(ListBox myControl, string myMessage);
public void DelegateMethod(ListBox myControl, string myMsg)
{
myControl.Items.Add(myMsg);
}
MQTT Server Start:
public async void StartMqttServer()
{
try
{
var mqttFactory = new MqttFactory();
if (mqttServer == null)
{
var mqttServerOptions = new MqttServerOptionsBuilder().WithDefaultEndpoint().WithDefaultEndpointPort(int.Parse(txtBoxPort.Text)).Build();
mqttServer.ClientConnectedHandler = new MqttServerClientConnectedHandlerDelegate(OnMqttServerClientConnected);
mqttServer.ClientDisconnectedHandler = new MqttServerClientDisconnectedHandlerDelegate(OnMqttServerClientDisconnected);
mqttServer.ClientSubscribedTopicHandler = new MqttServerClientSubscribedTopicHandlerDelegate(OnMqttServerCleitnSubScribedTopic);
mqttServer.ClientUnsubscribedTopicHandler = new MqttServerClientUnsubscribedTopicHandlerDelegate(OnMqttServerCleitnUnsubScribedTopic);
mqttServer.ApplicationMessageReceivedHandler = new MqttApplicationMessageReceivedHandlerDelegate(OnMqttServerApplicationMessageReceived);
await mqttServer.StartAsync(mqttServerOptions);
MsgList.BeginInvoke(updateMsgAction, "MQTT Server is started."); //Method 1
/*MsgList.BeginInvoke(new Action<string>((s) =>
{ MsgList.Items.Add(s); }), "MQTT Server is started."));*/ //Method 2
//MsgList.BeginInvoke(new MyDelegate(DelegateMethod), "MQTT Server is started.")); //Method 3
}
}
catch(Exception ex)
{
MsgList.BeginInvoke(updateMsgAction, "MQTT Server start fail."));
}
}
OnMqttServerApplicationMessageReceived:
public void OnMqttServerApplicationMessageReceived(MqttApplicationMessageReceivedEventArgs e)
{
// Method 1
MsgList.BeginInvoke(updateMsgAction,
String.Format("Client[{0}]>> Topic:{1} Payload:{2} Qos:{3} Retain:{4}",
e.ClientId, e.ApplicationMessage.Topic, e.ApplicationMessage.Payload.ToString(),
e.ApplicationMessage.QualityOfServiceLevel, e.ApplicationMessage.Retain));
}
BeginInvoke is used to execute some code in the thread in which the control was created. It's mandatory update controls in their own thread (usually in main thread) or you get an exception. So, your use or BeginInvoke is correct.
The problem is that, when you are running in the main thread and are be able to update the control, you delegate in an action the update. The action run in other thread and you are "cancelling" de BeginInvoke and getting the expected exception trying to update a control in other thread.
I use SynchronizationContext for this kind of things. In your form's code, add a variable:
private static SynchronizationContext Context;
UPDATE: And initialize in the constructor:
public YourForm()
{
this.InitializeComponent();
Context = SynchronizationContext.Current;
// Other code
}
Add this method:
private static void RunInMainThread(Action operation)
{
if (Context != SynchronizationContext.Current)
{
Context.Post(o => operation(), null);
}
else
{
operation();
}
}
If you already are running in main thread, your code run inmediatly. In other case, Post action run asynchronously in the main thread. You can use Send instead or Post to run synchronously. And use it when you need access to controls:
public void OnMqttServerApplicationMessageReceived(MqttApplicationMessageReceivedEventArgs e)
{
var msg = string.Format(
"Client[{0}]>> Topic:{1} Payload:{2} Qos:{3} Retain:{4}",
e.ClientId,
e.ApplicationMessage.Topic,
e.ApplicationMessage.Payload.ToString(),
e.ApplicationMessage.QualityOfServiceLevel,
e.ApplicationMessage.Retain);
RunInMainThread(() =>
{
MsgList.Items.Add(msg);
// Other code...
}
}
You can create an extension methods (Post and Send) for SynchronizationContext instead of RunInMainThread and reuse in your projects.
Related
Summary: I would like to call an asynchronous method in a constructor. Is this possible?
Details: I have a method called getwritings() that parses JSON data. Everything works fine if I just call getwritings() in an async method and put await to left of it. However , when I create a LongListView in my page and try to populate it I'm finding that getWritings() is surprisingly returning null and the LongListView is empty.
To address this problem, I tried changing the return type of getWritings() to Task<List<Writing>> and then retrieving the result in the constructor via getWritings().Result. However, doing that ends up blocking the UI thread.
public partial class Page2 : PhoneApplicationPage
{
List<Writing> writings;
public Page2()
{
InitializeComponent();
getWritings();
}
private async void getWritings()
{
string jsonData = await JsonDataManager.GetJsonAsync("1");
JObject obj = JObject.Parse(jsonData);
JArray array = (JArray)obj["posts"];
for (int i = 0; i < array.Count; i++)
{
Writing writing = new Writing();
writing.content = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "content");
writing.date = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "date");
writing.image = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "url");
writing.summary = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "excerpt");
writing.title = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "title");
writings.Add(writing);
}
myLongList.ItemsSource = writings;
}
}
The best solution is to acknowledge the asynchronous nature of the download and design for it.
In other words, decide what your application should look like while the data is downloading. Have the page constructor set up that view, and start the download. When the download completes update the page to display the data.
I have a blog post on asynchronous constructors that you may find useful. Also, some MSDN articles; one on asynchronous data-binding (if you're using MVVM) and another on asynchronous best practices (i.e., you should avoid async void).
You can also do just like this:
Task.Run(() => this.FunctionAsync()).Wait();
Note: Be careful about thread blocking!
I'd like to share a pattern that I've been using to solve these kinds of problems. It works rather well I think. Of course, it only works if you have control over what calls the constructor.
public class MyClass
{
public static async Task<MyClass> Create()
{
var myClass = new MyClass();
await myClass.Initialize();
return myClass;
}
private MyClass()
{
}
private async Task Initialize()
{
await Task.Delay(1000); // Do whatever asynchronous work you need to do
}
}
Basically what we do is we make the constructor private and make our own public static async method that is responsible for creating an instance of MyClass. By making the constructor private and keeping the static method within the same class we have made sure that no one could "accidentally" create an instance of this class without calling the proper initialization methods.
All the logic around the creation of the object is still contained within the class (just within a static method).
var myClass1 = new MyClass() // Cannot be done, the constructor is private
var myClass2 = MyClass.Create() // Returns a Task that promises an instance of MyClass once it's finished
var myClass3 = await MyClass.Create() // asynchronously creates and initializes an instance of MyClass
Implemented on the current scenario it would look something like:
public partial class Page2 : PhoneApplicationPage
{
public static async Task<Page2> Create()
{
var page = new Page2();
await page.getWritings();
return page;
}
List<Writing> writings;
private Page2()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private async Task getWritings()
{
string jsonData = await JsonDataManager.GetJsonAsync("1");
JObject obj = JObject.Parse(jsonData);
JArray array = (JArray)obj["posts"];
for (int i = 0; i < array.Count; i++)
{
Writing writing = new Writing();
writing.content = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "content");
writing.date = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "date");
writing.image = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "url");
writing.summary = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "excerpt");
writing.title = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "title");
writings.Add(writing);
}
myLongList.ItemsSource = writings;
}
}
Instead of doing
var page = new Page2();
you would be using:
var page = await Page2.Create();
A quick way to execute some time-consuming operation in any constructor is by creating an action and run them asynchronously.
new Action( async() => await InitializeThingsAsync())();
Running this piece of code will neither block your UI nor leave you with any loose threads. And if you need to update any UI (considering you are not using MVVM approach), you can use the Dispatcher to do so as many have suggested.
A Note: This option only provides you a way to start an execution of a method from the constructor if you don't have any init or onload or navigated overrides. Most likely this will keep on running even after the construction has been completed. Hence the result of this method call may NOT be available in the constructor itself.
My preferred approach:
// caution: fire and forget
Task.Run(async () => await someAsyncFunc());
Try to replace this:
myLongList.ItemsSource = writings;
with this
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(() => myLongList.ItemsSource = writings);
To put it simply, referring to Stephen Cleary https://stackoverflow.com/a/23051370/267000
your page on creation should create tasks in constructor and you should declare those tasks as class members or put it in your task pool.
Your data are fetched during these tasks, but these tasks should awaited in the code i.e. on some UI manipulations, i.e. Ok Click etc.
I developped such apps in WP, we had a whole bunch of tasks created on start.
You could try AsyncMVVM.
Page2.xaml:
<PhoneApplicationPage x:Class="Page2"
xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation">
<ListView ItemsSource="{Binding Writings}" />
</PhoneApplicationPage>
Page2.xaml.cs:
public partial class Page2
{
InitializeComponent();
DataContext = new ViewModel2();
}
ViewModel2.cs:
public class ViewModel2: AsyncBindableBase
{
public IEnumerable<Writing> Writings
{
get { return Property.Get(GetWritingsAsync); }
}
private async Task<IEnumerable<Writing>> GetWritingsAsync()
{
string jsonData = await JsonDataManager.GetJsonAsync("1");
JObject obj = JObject.Parse(jsonData);
JArray array = (JArray)obj["posts"];
for (int i = 0; i < array.Count; i++)
{
Writing writing = new Writing();
writing.content = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "content");
writing.date = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "date");
writing.image = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "url");
writing.summary = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "excerpt");
writing.title = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "title");
yield return writing;
}
}
}
Don't ever call .Wait() or .Result as this is going to lock your app.
Don't spin up a new Task either, just call the ContinueWith
public class myClass
{
public myClass
{
GetMessageAsync.ContinueWith(GetResultAsync);
}
async Task<string> GetMessageAsync()
{
return await Service.GetMessageFromAPI();
}
private async Task GetResultAsync(Task<string> resultTask)
{
if (resultTask.IsFaulted)
{
Log(resultTask.Exception);
}
eles
{
//do what ever you need from the result
}
}
}
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/asynchronous-programming-patterns/consuming-the-task-based-asynchronous-pattern
A little late to the party, but I think many are struggling with this...
I've been searching for this as well. And to get your method/action running async without waiting or blocking the thread, you'll need to queue it via the SynchronizationContext, so I came up with this solution:
I've made a helper-class for it.
public static class ASyncHelper
{
public static void RunAsync(Func<Task> func)
{
var context = SynchronizationContext.Current;
// you don't want to run it on a threadpool. So if it is null,
// you're not on a UI thread.
if (context == null)
throw new NotSupportedException(
"The current thread doesn't have a SynchronizationContext");
// post an Action as async and await the function in it.
context.Post(new SendOrPostCallback(async state => await func()), null);
}
public static void RunAsync<T>(Func<T, Task> func, T argument)
{
var context = SynchronizationContext.Current;
// you don't want to run it on a threadpool. So if it is null,
// you're not on a UI thread.
if (context == null)
throw new NotSupportedException(
"The current thread doesn't have a SynchronizationContext");
// post an Action as async and await the function in it.
context.Post(new SendOrPostCallback(async state => await func((T)state)), argument);
}
}
Usage/Example:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
private async Task Initialize()
{
// replace code here...
await Task.Delay(1000);
}
private async Task Run(string myString)
{
// replace code here...
await Task.Delay(1000);
}
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
// you don't have to await nothing.. (the thread must be running)
ASyncHelper.RunAsync(Initialize);
ASyncHelper.RunAsync(Run, "test");
// In your case
ASyncHelper.RunAsync(getWritings);
}
}
This works for Windows.Forms and WPF
In order to use async within the constructor and ensure the data is available when you instantiate the class, you can use this simple pattern:
class FooClass : IFooAsync
{
FooClass
{
this.FooAsync = InitFooTask();
}
public Task FooAsync { get; }
private async Task InitFooTask()
{
await Task.Delay(5000);
}
}
The interface:
public interface IFooAsync
{
Task FooAsync { get; }
}
The usage:
FooClass foo = new FooClass();
if (foo is IFooAsync)
await foo.FooAsync;
Brian Lagunas has shown a solution that I really like. More info his youtube video
Solution:
Add a TaskExtensions method
public static class TaskExtensions
{
public static async void Await(this Task task, Action completedCallback = null ,Action<Exception> errorCallBack = null )
{
try
{
await task;
completedCallback?.Invoke();
}
catch (Exception e)
{
errorCallBack?.Invoke(e);
}
}
}
Usage:
public class MyClass
{
public MyClass()
{
DoSomething().Await();
// DoSomething().Await(Completed, HandleError);
}
async Task DoSomething()
{
await Task.Delay(3000);
//Some works here
//throw new Exception("Thrown in task");
}
private void Completed()
{
//some thing;
}
private void HandleError(Exception ex)
{
//handle error
}
}
The answer is simple, If you are developing an UWP app, then add the async function to the Page_Loaded method of the page.
if you want it to wait task to be done you can improve madlars codes like below. (I tried on .net core 3.1 it worked )
var taskVar = Task.Run(async () => await someAsyncFunc());
taskVar.Wait();
You could put the async calls in a separate method and call that method in the constructor.
Although, this may lead to a situation where some variable values not being available at the time you expect them.
public NewTravelPageVM(){
GetVenues();
}
async void GetVenues(){
var locator = CrossGeolocator.Current;
var position = await locator.GetPositionAsync();
Venues = await Venue.GetVenues(position.Latitude, position.Longitude);
}
If I have a task running on a worker thread and when it finds something wrong, is it possible to pause and wait for the user to intervene before continuing?
For example, suppose I have something like this:
async void btnStartTask_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
await Task.Run(() => LongRunningTask());
}
// CPU-bound
bool LongRunningTask()
{
// Establish some connection here.
// Do some work here.
List<Foo> incorrectValues = GetIncorrectValuesFromAbove();
if (incorrectValues.Count > 0)
{
// Here, I want to present the "incorrect values" to the user (on the UI thread)
// and let them select whether to modify a value, ignore it, or abort.
var confirmedValues = WaitForUserInput(incorrectValues);
}
// Continue processing.
}
Is it possible to substitute WaitForUserInput() with something that runs on the UI thread, waits for the user's intervention, and then acts accordingly? If so, how? I'm not looking for complete code or anything; if someone could point me in the right direction, I would be grateful.
What you're looking for is almost exactly Progress<T>, except you want to have the thing that reports progress get a task back with some information that they can await and inspect the results of. Creating Progress<T> yourself isn't terribly hard., and you can reasonably easily adapt it so that it computes a result.
public interface IPrompt<TResult, TInput>
{
Task<TResult> Prompt(TInput input);
}
public class Prompt<TResult, TInput> : IPrompt<TResult, TInput>
{
private SynchronizationContext context;
private Func<TInput, Task<TResult>> prompt;
public Prompt(Func<TInput, Task<TResult>> prompt)
{
context = SynchronizationContext.Current ?? new SynchronizationContext();
this.prompt += prompt;
}
Task<TResult> IPrompt<TResult, TInput>.Prompt(TInput input)
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<TResult>();
context.Post(data => prompt((TInput)data)
.ContinueWith(task =>
{
if (task.IsCanceled)
tcs.TrySetCanceled();
if (task.IsFaulted)
tcs.TrySetException(task.Exception.InnerExceptions);
else
tcs.TrySetResult(task.Result);
}), input);
return tcs.Task;
}
}
Now you simply need to have an asynchronous method that accepts the data from the long running process and returns a task with whatever the user interface's response is.
You can use TaskCompletionSource to generate a task that can be awaited within the LongRunningTask.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace ConsoleApp5
{
class Program
{
private static event Action<string> Input;
public static async Task Main(string[] args)
{
var inputTask = InputTask();
var longRunningTask = Task.Run(() => LongRunningTask());
await Task.WhenAll(inputTask, longRunningTask);
}
private static async Task InputTask()
{
await Task.Yield();
while(true)
{
var input = await Console.In.ReadLineAsync();
Input?.Invoke(input);
}
}
static async Task<bool> LongRunningTask()
{
SomeExpensiveCall();
var incorrectValues = GetIncorrectValuesFromAbove();
if (incorrectValues.Count > 0)
{
var confirmedValues = await WaitForUserInput(incorrectValues).ConfigureAwait(false);
}
// Continue processing.
return true;
}
private static void SomeExpensiveCall()
{
}
private static Task<string> WaitForUserInput(IList<string> incorrectValues)
{
var taskCompletionSource = new TaskCompletionSource<string>();
Console.Write("Input Data: ");
try
{
void EventHandler(string input)
{
Input -= EventHandler;
taskCompletionSource.TrySetResult(input);
}
Input += EventHandler;
}
catch(Exception e)
{
taskCompletionSource.TrySetException(e);
}
return taskCompletionSource.Task;
}
private static IList<string> GetIncorrectValuesFromAbove()
{
return new List<string> { "Test" };
}
}
}
Of course in this example you could have just called await Console.In.ReadLineAsync() directly, but this code is to simulate an environment where you only have an event based API.
There are several ways to solve this problem, with the Control.Invoke being probably the most familiar. Here is a more TPL-ish approach. You start by declaring a UI related scheduler as a class field:
private TaskScheduler _uiScheduler;
Then initialize it:
public MyForm()
{
InitializeComponent();
_uiScheduler = TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext();
}
Then you convert your synchronous LongRunning method to an asynchronous method. This means that it must return Task<bool> instead of bool. It must also have the async modifier, and by convention be named with the Async suffix:
async Task<bool> LongRunningAsync()
Finally you use the await operator in order to wait for the user's input, which will be a Task configured to run on the captured UI scheduler:
async Task<bool> LongRunningAsync()
{
// Establish some connection here.
// Do some work here.
List<Foo> incorrectValues = GetIncorrectValuesFromAbove();
if (incorrectValues.Count > 0)
{
// Here, I want to present the "incorrect values" to the user (on the UI thread)
// and let them select whether to modify a value, ignore it, or abort.
var confirmedValues = await Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
return WaitForUserInput(incorrectValues);
}, default, TaskCreationOptions.None, _uiScheduler);
}
// Continue processing.
}
Starting the long running task is the same as before. The Task.Run understands async delegates, so you don't have to do something special after making the method async.
var longRunningTask = Task.Run(() => LongRunningAsync());
This should be enough, provided that you just intend to show a dialog box to the user. The Form.ShowDialog is a blocking method, so the WaitForUserInput method needs not to be asynchronous. If you had to allow the user to interact freely with the main form, the problem would be much more difficult to solve.
Another example using Invoke() and a ManualResetEvent. Let me know if you need help with the form code; setting up a constructor, using DialogResult, or creating a property to hold the "confirmedValues":
bool LongRunningTask()
{
// Establish some connection here.
// Do some work here.
List<Foo> incorrectValues = GetIncorrectValuesFromAbove();
var confirmedValues;
if (incorrectValues.Count > 0)
{
DialogResult result;
ManualResetEvent mre = new ManualResetEvent(false);
this.Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate
{
// pass in incorrectValues to the form
// you'll have to build a constructor in it to accept them
frmSomeForm frm = new frmSomeForm(incorrectValues);
result = frm.ShowDialog();
if (result == DialogResult.OK)
{
confirmedValues = frm.confirmedValues; // get the confirmed values somehow
}
mre.Set(); // release the block below
});
mre.WaitOne(); // blocks until "mre" is set
}
// Continue processing.
}
Summary: I would like to call an asynchronous method in a constructor. Is this possible?
Details: I have a method called getwritings() that parses JSON data. Everything works fine if I just call getwritings() in an async method and put await to left of it. However , when I create a LongListView in my page and try to populate it I'm finding that getWritings() is surprisingly returning null and the LongListView is empty.
To address this problem, I tried changing the return type of getWritings() to Task<List<Writing>> and then retrieving the result in the constructor via getWritings().Result. However, doing that ends up blocking the UI thread.
public partial class Page2 : PhoneApplicationPage
{
List<Writing> writings;
public Page2()
{
InitializeComponent();
getWritings();
}
private async void getWritings()
{
string jsonData = await JsonDataManager.GetJsonAsync("1");
JObject obj = JObject.Parse(jsonData);
JArray array = (JArray)obj["posts"];
for (int i = 0; i < array.Count; i++)
{
Writing writing = new Writing();
writing.content = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "content");
writing.date = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "date");
writing.image = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "url");
writing.summary = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "excerpt");
writing.title = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "title");
writings.Add(writing);
}
myLongList.ItemsSource = writings;
}
}
The best solution is to acknowledge the asynchronous nature of the download and design for it.
In other words, decide what your application should look like while the data is downloading. Have the page constructor set up that view, and start the download. When the download completes update the page to display the data.
I have a blog post on asynchronous constructors that you may find useful. Also, some MSDN articles; one on asynchronous data-binding (if you're using MVVM) and another on asynchronous best practices (i.e., you should avoid async void).
You can also do just like this:
Task.Run(() => this.FunctionAsync()).Wait();
Note: Be careful about thread blocking!
I'd like to share a pattern that I've been using to solve these kinds of problems. It works rather well I think. Of course, it only works if you have control over what calls the constructor.
public class MyClass
{
public static async Task<MyClass> Create()
{
var myClass = new MyClass();
await myClass.Initialize();
return myClass;
}
private MyClass()
{
}
private async Task Initialize()
{
await Task.Delay(1000); // Do whatever asynchronous work you need to do
}
}
Basically what we do is we make the constructor private and make our own public static async method that is responsible for creating an instance of MyClass. By making the constructor private and keeping the static method within the same class we have made sure that no one could "accidentally" create an instance of this class without calling the proper initialization methods.
All the logic around the creation of the object is still contained within the class (just within a static method).
var myClass1 = new MyClass() // Cannot be done, the constructor is private
var myClass2 = MyClass.Create() // Returns a Task that promises an instance of MyClass once it's finished
var myClass3 = await MyClass.Create() // asynchronously creates and initializes an instance of MyClass
Implemented on the current scenario it would look something like:
public partial class Page2 : PhoneApplicationPage
{
public static async Task<Page2> Create()
{
var page = new Page2();
await page.getWritings();
return page;
}
List<Writing> writings;
private Page2()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private async Task getWritings()
{
string jsonData = await JsonDataManager.GetJsonAsync("1");
JObject obj = JObject.Parse(jsonData);
JArray array = (JArray)obj["posts"];
for (int i = 0; i < array.Count; i++)
{
Writing writing = new Writing();
writing.content = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "content");
writing.date = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "date");
writing.image = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "url");
writing.summary = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "excerpt");
writing.title = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "title");
writings.Add(writing);
}
myLongList.ItemsSource = writings;
}
}
Instead of doing
var page = new Page2();
you would be using:
var page = await Page2.Create();
A quick way to execute some time-consuming operation in any constructor is by creating an action and run them asynchronously.
new Action( async() => await InitializeThingsAsync())();
Running this piece of code will neither block your UI nor leave you with any loose threads. And if you need to update any UI (considering you are not using MVVM approach), you can use the Dispatcher to do so as many have suggested.
A Note: This option only provides you a way to start an execution of a method from the constructor if you don't have any init or onload or navigated overrides. Most likely this will keep on running even after the construction has been completed. Hence the result of this method call may NOT be available in the constructor itself.
My preferred approach:
// caution: fire and forget
Task.Run(async () => await someAsyncFunc());
Try to replace this:
myLongList.ItemsSource = writings;
with this
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(() => myLongList.ItemsSource = writings);
To put it simply, referring to Stephen Cleary https://stackoverflow.com/a/23051370/267000
your page on creation should create tasks in constructor and you should declare those tasks as class members or put it in your task pool.
Your data are fetched during these tasks, but these tasks should awaited in the code i.e. on some UI manipulations, i.e. Ok Click etc.
I developped such apps in WP, we had a whole bunch of tasks created on start.
You could try AsyncMVVM.
Page2.xaml:
<PhoneApplicationPage x:Class="Page2"
xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation">
<ListView ItemsSource="{Binding Writings}" />
</PhoneApplicationPage>
Page2.xaml.cs:
public partial class Page2
{
InitializeComponent();
DataContext = new ViewModel2();
}
ViewModel2.cs:
public class ViewModel2: AsyncBindableBase
{
public IEnumerable<Writing> Writings
{
get { return Property.Get(GetWritingsAsync); }
}
private async Task<IEnumerable<Writing>> GetWritingsAsync()
{
string jsonData = await JsonDataManager.GetJsonAsync("1");
JObject obj = JObject.Parse(jsonData);
JArray array = (JArray)obj["posts"];
for (int i = 0; i < array.Count; i++)
{
Writing writing = new Writing();
writing.content = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "content");
writing.date = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "date");
writing.image = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "url");
writing.summary = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "excerpt");
writing.title = JsonDataManager.JsonParse(array, i, "title");
yield return writing;
}
}
}
Don't ever call .Wait() or .Result as this is going to lock your app.
Don't spin up a new Task either, just call the ContinueWith
public class myClass
{
public myClass
{
GetMessageAsync.ContinueWith(GetResultAsync);
}
async Task<string> GetMessageAsync()
{
return await Service.GetMessageFromAPI();
}
private async Task GetResultAsync(Task<string> resultTask)
{
if (resultTask.IsFaulted)
{
Log(resultTask.Exception);
}
eles
{
//do what ever you need from the result
}
}
}
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/asynchronous-programming-patterns/consuming-the-task-based-asynchronous-pattern
A little late to the party, but I think many are struggling with this...
I've been searching for this as well. And to get your method/action running async without waiting or blocking the thread, you'll need to queue it via the SynchronizationContext, so I came up with this solution:
I've made a helper-class for it.
public static class ASyncHelper
{
public static void RunAsync(Func<Task> func)
{
var context = SynchronizationContext.Current;
// you don't want to run it on a threadpool. So if it is null,
// you're not on a UI thread.
if (context == null)
throw new NotSupportedException(
"The current thread doesn't have a SynchronizationContext");
// post an Action as async and await the function in it.
context.Post(new SendOrPostCallback(async state => await func()), null);
}
public static void RunAsync<T>(Func<T, Task> func, T argument)
{
var context = SynchronizationContext.Current;
// you don't want to run it on a threadpool. So if it is null,
// you're not on a UI thread.
if (context == null)
throw new NotSupportedException(
"The current thread doesn't have a SynchronizationContext");
// post an Action as async and await the function in it.
context.Post(new SendOrPostCallback(async state => await func((T)state)), argument);
}
}
Usage/Example:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
private async Task Initialize()
{
// replace code here...
await Task.Delay(1000);
}
private async Task Run(string myString)
{
// replace code here...
await Task.Delay(1000);
}
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
// you don't have to await nothing.. (the thread must be running)
ASyncHelper.RunAsync(Initialize);
ASyncHelper.RunAsync(Run, "test");
// In your case
ASyncHelper.RunAsync(getWritings);
}
}
This works for Windows.Forms and WPF
In order to use async within the constructor and ensure the data is available when you instantiate the class, you can use this simple pattern:
class FooClass : IFooAsync
{
FooClass
{
this.FooAsync = InitFooTask();
}
public Task FooAsync { get; }
private async Task InitFooTask()
{
await Task.Delay(5000);
}
}
The interface:
public interface IFooAsync
{
Task FooAsync { get; }
}
The usage:
FooClass foo = new FooClass();
if (foo is IFooAsync)
await foo.FooAsync;
Brian Lagunas has shown a solution that I really like. More info his youtube video
Solution:
Add a TaskExtensions method
public static class TaskExtensions
{
public static async void Await(this Task task, Action completedCallback = null ,Action<Exception> errorCallBack = null )
{
try
{
await task;
completedCallback?.Invoke();
}
catch (Exception e)
{
errorCallBack?.Invoke(e);
}
}
}
Usage:
public class MyClass
{
public MyClass()
{
DoSomething().Await();
// DoSomething().Await(Completed, HandleError);
}
async Task DoSomething()
{
await Task.Delay(3000);
//Some works here
//throw new Exception("Thrown in task");
}
private void Completed()
{
//some thing;
}
private void HandleError(Exception ex)
{
//handle error
}
}
The answer is simple, If you are developing an UWP app, then add the async function to the Page_Loaded method of the page.
if you want it to wait task to be done you can improve madlars codes like below. (I tried on .net core 3.1 it worked )
var taskVar = Task.Run(async () => await someAsyncFunc());
taskVar.Wait();
You could put the async calls in a separate method and call that method in the constructor.
Although, this may lead to a situation where some variable values not being available at the time you expect them.
public NewTravelPageVM(){
GetVenues();
}
async void GetVenues(){
var locator = CrossGeolocator.Current;
var position = await locator.GetPositionAsync();
Venues = await Venue.GetVenues(position.Latitude, position.Longitude);
}
Basically what I'm doing is I'm creating a temporary buffer that writes data to a byte[] and then returns the size of the buffer; I'm then using this to attempt to de-segmentate my code over a network. (Trying to get my C# Client to work properly with Netty's FrameDecoder class)
Basically, I'm storing all of my Actions in a List to be called over the network once I find the buffer-size(Dynamic)
public void SendBuffer(DataOutputStream ClientOuput)
{
ClientOuput.WriteInt(GetBufferSize());
foreach (Action a in executionList)
{
// What Do?
}
}
My problem is I need to Invoke the method inside of the DataOutputStream that's passed through the SendBuffer parameters, so something like
ClientOutput.a.invoke();
What's the best way to do this?
It's not that clear what you are asking but I try to answer anyway. So you have bunch of actions (defined somewhere) that you want to be executed by instance of DataOutputStream? Then you could do something like:
public async void SendBuffer(DataOutputStream clientOuput)
{
var executionList = new List<Action>()
{
() => { Debug.WriteLine("whatyousay"); Thread.Sleep(1500); },
() => { Debug.WriteLine("allyourbase"); Thread.Sleep(1500); },
};
clientOuput.WriteInt(1);
foreach (Action action in executionList)
await clientOuput.Execute(action);
Debug.WriteLine("arebelongtous");
}
Here DataOutputStream is just
public class DataOutputStream
{
// await and actions will be executed in given order, non-blocking
public Task Execute(Action action)
{
return Task.Run(action);
}
// fire & forget, non-blocking
public void BeginInvoke(Action action)
{
action.BeginInvoke(callback => {}, null);
}
// blocking
public void Invoke(Action action)
{
action.Invoke();
}
public void WriteInt(int integer)
{
Debug.WriteLine("int:{0}", integer);
}
}
I have a component that submits requests to a web-based API, but these requests must be throttled so as not to contravene the API's data limits. This means that all requests must pass through a queue to control the rate at which they are submitted, but they can (and should) execute concurrently to achieve maximum throughput. Each request must return some data to the calling code at some point in the future when it completes.
I'm struggling to create a nice model to handle the return of data.
Using a BlockingCollection I can't just return a Task<TResult> from the Schedule method, because the enqueuing and dequeuing processes are at either ends of the buffer. So instead I create a RequestItem<TResult> type that contains a callback of the form Action<Task<TResult>>.
The idea is that once an item has been pulled from the queue the callback can be invoked with the started task, but I've lost the generic type parameters by that point and I'm left using reflection and all kinds of nastiness (if it's even possible).
For example:
public class RequestScheduler
{
private readonly BlockingCollection<IRequestItem> _queue = new BlockingCollection<IRequestItem>();
public RequestScheduler()
{
this.Start();
}
// This can't return Task<TResult>, so returns void.
// Instead RequestItem is generic but this poses problems when adding to the queue
public void Schedule<TResult>(RequestItem<TResult> request)
{
_queue.Add(request);
}
private void Start()
{
Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
foreach (var item in _queue.GetConsumingEnumerable())
{
// I want to be able to use the original type parameters here
// is there a nice way without reflection?
// ProcessItem submits an HttpWebRequest
Task.Factory.StartNew(() => ProcessItem(item))
.ContinueWith(t => { item.Callback(t); });
}
});
}
public void Stop()
{
_queue.CompleteAdding();
}
}
public class RequestItem<TResult> : IRequestItem
{
public IOperation<TResult> Operation { get; set; }
public Action<Task<TResult>> Callback { get; set; }
}
How can I continue to buffer my requests but return a Task<TResult> to the client when the request is pulled from the buffer and submitted to the API?
First, you can return Task<TResult> from Schedule(), you just need to use TaskCompletionSource for that.
Second, to get around the genericity issue, you can hide all of it inside (non-generic) Actions. In Schedule(), create an action using a lambda that does exactly what you need. The consuming loop will then execute that action, it doesn't need to know what's inside.
Third, I don't understand why are you starting a new Task in each iteration of the loop. For one, it means you won't actually get any throttling.
With these modifications, the code could look like this:
public class RequestScheduler
{
private readonly BlockingCollection<Action> m_queue = new BlockingCollection<Action>();
public RequestScheduler()
{
this.Start();
}
private void Start()
{
Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
foreach (var action in m_queue.GetConsumingEnumerable())
{
action();
}
}, TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning);
}
public Task<TResult> Schedule<TResult>(IOperation<TResult> operation)
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<TResult>();
Action action = () =>
{
try
{
tcs.SetResult(ProcessItem(operation));
}
catch (Exception e)
{
tcs.SetException(e);
}
};
m_queue.Add(action);
return tcs.Task;
}
private T ProcessItem<T>(IOperation<T> operation)
{
// whatever
}
}