Implement jQuery-like document.ready-Event - c#

I'm creating a asp.net core application which is using the new HostedService-feature of asp.net core 2.1. Some of those services registered via services.AddHostedService() are dependant on other services and I'm looking for a way to notify the "child-services" when the "parent-service" gets ready.
My first implementation looked like this:
// Parent class
public delegate void OnServiceReadyHandler(object sender);
public event OnServiceReadyHandler OnServiceReady;
public void Init()
{
// Do stuff
OnServiceReady?.Invoke(this);
}
// Child class
_parentService.OnServiceReady += (sender) =>
{
// Do stuff
};
But this leads to a problem when the child class subscribes to the OnServiceReady-Event after it already fired, therefore never getting notified.
I then thought about a property on the parent-class, something like IsRead, but this might as well lead to a race condition (between reading the property and subscribing to the ready-event).
Doing lots of web stuff lately jQuerys document.ready-event came to my mind. It fires after the document got ready or immediately if it is already in ready-state. I changed my implementation to this:
// Parent class
private bool IsReady { get; set; } = false;
public delegate void OnServiceReadyHandler(object sender);
private OnServiceReadyHandler onServiceReadyHandler;
public event OnServiceReadyHandler OnServiceReady
{
add
{
if (!IsReady)
onServiceReadyHandler = (OnServiceReadyHandler)Delegate.Combine(onServiceReadyHandler, value);
else
value(this);
}
// Remove ...
}
public void Init()
{
// Do stuff
IsReady = true;
OnServiceReady?.Invoke(this);
}
// Child class
_parentService.OnServiceReady += (sender) =>
{
// Do stuff
};
This looks like it is working fine, but I'm wondering if there's a) still the chance of a race condition and the client not getting notified here and b) a more elegant solution to this problem or this implementation?

Yes, you can still have a race condition here:
if (!IsReady)
onServiceReadyHandler = (OnServiceReadyHandler)Delegate.Combine(onServiceReadyHandler, value);
You could have a case where IsReady is evaluated to false, but before the event handler can be updated, the Init() method sets IsReady to true and fires the event. Then the second line above runs and the event never gets fired again.
The example in the documentation for the add keyword shows the use of lock. That's probably what you should be using here - in the add and remove accessors, as well as in your Init() method.
Also, is there any reason you are using Delegate.Combine() here? The docs just show you can use +=.
public event OnServiceReadyHandler OnServiceReady
{
add
{
lock (onServiceReadyHandler) {
if (!IsReady)
onServiceReadyHandler += value;
else
value(this);
}
}
// Remove ...
}
public void Init()
{
// Do stuff
lock (onServiceReadyHandler) {
IsReady = true;
}
OnServiceReady?.Invoke(this);
}

Related

Is there a way to let a class know that something subscribed to its delegate successfully ran?

I have one class called TerminalCommandScanUtility.cs with a delegate called ScanUtility:
public static event Action scanUtilityEvent;
public void ScanUtility()
{
if (scanUtilityEvent != null)
{
scanUtilityEvent();
}
}
In another class called FolderEvent.cs, I listen for this delegate being fired as follows:
bool isScannable;
TerminalCommandScanUtility.scanUtilityEvent += StartFolderScan;
void StartFolderScan()
{
if(!isScannable)
{
return;
}
else
{
//How can I inform TerminalCommandScanUtility that this folder was scannable, and thus ran?
}
}
When the scan utility runs, I want it to be able to know that a folder's isScannable variable was true so that I can display some feedback text for the user like "Despite running the function.. nothing was scanned", or "One folder has begun scanning!"
You need to implement the INotifyPropertyChanged interface for TerminalCommandScanUtility and a corresponding event handler. There is a similar post here.

How to disable subscription to an event from many instances of one type and allow only one?

I have Windows Forms application with one main form (derived from base Form). Other modal forms that could be opened there are derived from my class ManagedForm, which is also derived from Form.
Also I have a static notifier service which fires some events like this:
public static class NotifierService
{
public delegate void NotifierServiceEventHandler(object sender, NotifierServiceEventArgs e);
private static readonly object Locker = new object();
private static NotifierServiceEventHandler _notifierServiceEventHandler;
#region Events
public static event NotifierServiceEventHandler OnOk
{
add
{
lock (Locker)
{
_notifierServiceEventHandler += value;
if (
_notifierServiceEventHandler.GetInvocationList()
.Count(
_ =>
_.Method.DeclaringType != null &&
value.Method.DeclaringType != null &&
_.Method.DeclaringType == value.Method.DeclaringType) <= 1)
return;
_notifierServiceEventHandler -= value;
}
}
remove
{
lock (Locker)
{
_notifierServiceEventHandler -= value;
}
}
}
// and many more events similar to previous...
#endregion
#region Event firing methods
public static void NotifyOk(string fullMessage = "Ok.", string shortMessage = null)
{
NotifierServiceEventHandler handler;
lock (Locker)
{
handler = _notifierServiceEventHandler;
}
if (handler == null) return;
handler(typeof (NotifierService),
new NotifierServiceEventArgs(StatusType.Ok, fullMessage, shortMessage ?? fullMessage));
}
#endregion
}
So in some places of code these events could be fired like:
NotifierService.NotifyExclamation("Fail!");
In the main form there is StatusStrip control used for notification purposes, and due to main form has subscribtion to these events -- their messages will be shown in the status strip.
BUT!, as I've said earlier, user may open other forms, and these forms could produce others and so on... (they are derived from one class ManagedForm which will be subscribed to NotifierService as soon as it has been created).
In these forms there is another logic how to notify user -- they need to show MessageBoxes with messages. As you can see, I've added some magic in event accessors to allow only one subscriber of any type, because w/o this all opened forms will generate their own MessageBoxes. But when one child ManagedForm has produced another and the second has been closed -- no MessageBoxes will be shown.
What magic should I implement to allow subscription from only first ManagedForm? Many thanks for any ideas.
EDIT: Suggested ideas doesn't solve this issue. I've tried to change event to this:
private static readonly object Locker = new object();
private static EventHandler<NotifierServiceEventArgs> _myEvent;
public static event EventHandler<NotifierServiceEventArgs> OnOk
{
add
{
if (_myEvent == null || _myEvent.GetInvocationList().All(_ => _.Method.DeclaringType != value.Method.DeclaringType))
{
_myEvent += value;
}
}
remove
{
_myEvent -= value;
}
}
Then I've open one modal child form and create a situation in which event has been fired by NotifierService. One MessageBox has been generated and shown (that's OK). Afterwards I've opened another modal form from first and create another situation in which another event has been fired. One MessageBox has been generated and shown (that's also OK). Now I'm closing second form and making a situation needed to fire event. No MessageBoxes has been shown (but in the status strip of the main form message of event has been shown correctly, so nothing has been changed from my first implementation).
Should I change something in remove clause? I do not need that only one subscriber should be, I need that each of the subscribers should be of distinct types. Sorry If bad English.
The way you are trying to solve the problem is fundamentally wrong by design. Your service class defines an event that will be fired under some circumstances. Some clients subscribe to that event, this way requesting to be notified when it happened. This is simply the .NET way of implementing the Observer pattern, so your service (being the subject or observable), should not apply any logic neither at subscribe nor the notify part, thus defeating the whole purpose of the pattern. Hans Passant already pointed to some flaws in your design, but even his solution is not perfect because looking at the event signature, it's totally unclear that only form instance methods are supposed to be registered - one can try using static method, anonymous lambda/method, some class method etc.
So, IMO the following are some of the viable choices you have.
(A) Keep your NotificationService events, but remove any "magic" from both subscribe and notify parts (shortly, use the regular way of defining and firing an event) and put the logic needed in your subscribers:
public static class NotifierService
{
public delegate void NotifierServiceEventHandler(object sender, NotifierServiceEventArgs e);
public static event NotifierServiceEventHandler OnOk;
public static void NotifyOk(string fullMessage = "Ok.", string shortMessage = null)
{
var handler = OnOk;
if (handler != null)
handler(typeof(NotifierService), new NotifierServiceEventArgs(StatusType.Ok, fullMessage, shortMessage ?? fullMessage));
}
}
Assuming that only the active form is supposed to handle the notifications, the existing handlers in both your MainForm and ManagedForm would use something like this inside their method body
if (this != ActiveForm) return;
// do the processing
You can even create a base form like this
class NotifiedForm : Form
{
protected override void OnActivated(EventArgs e)
{
base.OnActivated(e);
NotifierService.OnOk += OnNotifyOK;
// similar for other events
}
protected override void OnDeactivate(EventArgs e)
{
base.OnDeactivate(e);
NotifierService.OnOk -= OnNotifyOK;
// similar for other events
}
protected virtual void OnNotifyOK(object sender, NotifierServiceEventArgs e) { }
// similar for other events
}
and let your MainForm, ManagedForm (and any other is needed) inherit from that and just override the OnNotifyXXX methods and apply their logic.
To conclude, this approach would keep your service abstract and will leave the decisions to the clients of the service.
(B) If the sole purpose of your service is to act like a notification coordinator specifically for your forms, then you can remove events along with subscribe/unsubscribe parts (since Application.OpenForms and Form.ActiveForm already provide enough information needed) and handle the logic in your service. In order to do that, you'll need some sort of a base interface(s) or forms, and the easiest would be to use a similar approach to what was optional in the option (A) by creating a base form class like this
class NotifiedForm : Form
{
public virtual void OnNotifyOK(object sender, NotifierServiceEventArgs e) { }
// similar for other notifications
}
and let your MainForm, ManagedForm and other needed inherit from it. Note that there is no logic here (checking ActiveForm etc.) because now that's the responsibility of the caller. Then the service could be something like this:
public static class NotifierService
{
public static void NotifyOk(string fullMessage = "Ok.", string shortMessage = null)
{
var target = Form.ActiveForm as NotifiedForm;
if (target != null)
target.OnNotifyOK(typeof(NotifierService), new NotifierServiceEventArgs(StatusType.Ok, fullMessage, shortMessage ?? fullMessage));
}
// similar for other notifications
}
if the logic is to notify only the active form.
Or
public static class NotifierService
{
public static void NotifyOk(string fullMessage = "Ok.", string shortMessage = null)
{
// Could also be a forward for, forach etc.
for (int i = Application.OpenForms.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
var target = Application.OpenForms[i] as NotifiedForm;
if (target != null /* && someOtherCritaria(target) */)
{
target.OnNotifyOK(typeof(NotifierService), new NotifierServiceEventArgs(StatusType.Ok, fullMessage, shortMessage ?? fullMessage));
// Could also continue
break;
}
}
}
// similar for other notifications
}
if some other logic is needed (which I doubt).
Hope that helps. In any case, option (A) is more flexible and allows much more usage scenarios, but if the usage scenarios are fixed by design, then the option (B) is better because it requires less from the clients (thus being less error prone) and provides a centralized application logic in one place.
I would like you proceed as follows:
Remove the magic from event accessor method and let all the subscribers subscribe to the event. So now you will have your main form and all other forms subscribed to the event.
Now place the magic in your event invocation method. For example in your NotifyOK method, first get the invocation list of deligate, now invoke each deligate one by one using DynamicInvoke or Invoke method of each deligate in the invocation list only if you have not already invoked for the particular DeclaringType. See the algo below:
public static void NotifyOk(string fullMessage = "Ok.", string shortMessage = null)
{
NotifierServiceEventHandler handler;
lock (Locker)
{
handler = _notifierServiceEventHandler;
}
if (handler == null) return;
// Get invocation list of handler as you have done in event accessor
//initialise a new List<T> to hold the declaring types
// loop through each member (delegate) of invocation list
// if the current member declaration type is not in List<t>
// Invoke or DynamicInvoke current delegate
// add the declaration type of current delegate to List<t>
}
Try this:?)
private bool _eventHasSubscribers = false;
private EventHandler<MyDelegateType> _myEvent;
public event EventHandler<MyDelegateType> MyEvent
{
add
{
if (_myEvent == null)
{
_myEvent += value;
}
}
remove
{
_myEvent -= value;
}
}
i have reduced NotifierService to this:
public static class NotifierService
{
public static event EventHandler<NotifierServiceEventArgs> OnOk = delegate { };
public static void NotifyOk(string fullMessage = "Ok.", string shortMessage = null)
{
OnOk(typeof(NotifierService),
new NotifierServiceEventArgs(StatusType.Ok, fullMessage, shortMessage ?? fullMessage));
}
}
and then in ManagedForm used this handler
NotifierService.OnOk += Notify;
private void Notify(object sender, NotifierServiceEventArgs e)
{
// handle event in first open ManagedForm
if (Application.OpenForms.OfType<ManagedForm>().FirstOrDefault() == this)
{
// notification logic
}
}
if forms are opened as Modal (using ShowDialog()), it is possible to use another variant (according to this question):
private void Notify(object sender, NotifierServiceEventArgs e)
{
// handle event in active (last shown) ManagedForm
if (this.CanFocus)
{
// notification logic
}
}
so the idea is that all ManagedForms receive event data and then decide should they do something or not
P.S.: unsubscribe handlers on Dispose
protected override void Dispose(bool disposing)
{
if (disposing)
{
NotifierService.OnOk -= Notify;
}
// default
if (disposing && (components != null))
{
components.Dispose();
}
base.Dispose(disposing);
}
I have made a setup similar to yours & I see the problem.
I'll give 2 working suggestion to fix the issue (you may choose as per the changes required) -
Quickest fix with minimal changes to your original code -
So this is what I understand from the problem situation - You hooked event NotifierService.OnOk to an event handler in class ManagedForm & also wrote code to unhook the event handler from event NotifierService.OnOk when the form closes.
I'm assuming that you wrote the code to unhook the event handler from event NotifierService.OnOk when the form closes
But what I'm not sure is that when do you hook event NotifierService.OnOk to its event handler in managed form. Thats critical & I guess thats the only problem in your setup.
I assume you have set it up at a place which happens only once in the lifetime of form - like constructor or Load Event handler. And thats how I could reproduce the problem.
As fix, Just move hooking the event NotifierService.OnOk to its event handler at a place which which is called everytime the form becomes active
like
something like this -
public partial class ManagedFrom : Form
{
// this is the fix. Everytime the form comes up. It tries to register itself.
//The existing magic will consider its request to register only when the other form is closed or if its the 1st of its type.
protected override void OnActivated(EventArgs e)
{
base.OnActivated(e);
NotifierService.OnOk += NotifierService_OnOk;
}
No more change needed, your existing logic in the event will take care of rest.
I have written the reason as comment in code above.
A little Better way but needs more changes
I would like to relieve the event OnOk form all the additional (& magical) responsibilities, I change the event
public static event NotifierServiceEventHandler OnOk
{
add
{
lock (Locker) // I'm not removing the locks. May be the publisher works in a multithreaded business layer.
{
_notifierServiceEventHandler += value;
}
}
remove
{
lock (Locker)
{
_notifierServiceEventHandler -= value;
}
}
}
Instead the subscriber should know when to Start and when to stop the subscription.
Therefore I change ManagedFrom
public partial class ManagedFrom : Form
{
//start the subscription
protected override void OnActivated(EventArgs e)
{
base.OnActivated(e);
NotifierService.OnOk += NotifierService_OnOk;
}
//stop the subscription
protected override void OnDeactivate(EventArgs e)
{
base.OnDeactivate(e);
NotifierService.OnOk -= NotifierService_OnOk;
}
In both the suggestions, my intend is to just fix the issue without introducing any new pattern. But do let me know if thats needed.
Also do let me know if it was helpful or if you think I took any wrong assumption .
To sum up:
there are multiple sources of events;
there are multiple targets;
there are different types of events which have to be processed differently.
Idea to use static manager is ok (unless you have performance issues, then splitting into multiple different message queues is the option), but cheating with subscribing/unsubscribing feels so wrong.
Make a simple event
public enum MessageType { StatusText, MessageBox }
public NotifyEventArgs: EventArgs
{
public MessageType Type { get; }
public string Message { get; }
public NotifyEventArgs(MessageType type, string message)
{
Type = type;
Message = message;
}
}
public static NotifyManager
{
public event EventHandler<NotifyMessageArgs> Notify;
public static OnEventHandler(MessageType type, string message) =>
Notify?.Invoke(null, new NotifyEventArgs(type, message));
}
Each form has to subscribe to this event when shown and unsubscribe when hidden. Not sure which events are the best here (got used to much to WPF Loaded, Unloaded, but there is no such in winforms, try to use Shown or VisibilityChanged perhaps).
Each form will receive event, but only one has to process MessageBox type (it is safe for all of them to display StatusMessage). For this you need some mechanizm to decide whenever form is the one (used to display message boxes). E.g. it can be active form:
void NotifyManager_Event(object sender, NotifyEventArgs e)
{
if(e.Type == MessageType.MessageBox && this == Form.ActiveForm)
MessageBox.Show(this, e.Message);
else
statusBar.Text = e.Message;
}
Are you sure that it is the task of the NotifierService to make sure that only one Form will show the notification?
If you would describe the tasks of a NotifierService, you would describe what it does and "whenever the NotifierService has something to notify, it will notify everyone who said that it wanted to be notified about the notifications"
This would make your notifierservice less dependant of the current application where it is used. If you want a completely different application with for instance only two Forms, where you want both Forms to react on the notifications you could not use this notifierservice.
But in my Forms application only one form may react on the notifications
That is right: it is your Forms application that has this constraint, not the notifierservice. You make a Forms aplication that may use any kind of notifierservice, but whatever notifierservice is used, only one of the Forms in my application may show the notification.
This means that you should have some rule to know whether a form should show the notifications or not
For instance:
Only the current form may show the notifications
Only the top left form may show the notifications
Only the main form may show the notifications, except when the settings form is visible
So let's assume you have something to determine which Form or Forms may react on notifications. This changes upon something happening: a form becomes active, or a form closes, a form becomes invisible, whatever.
Make a Boolean property for a ManagedForm that holds whether it should show notifications:
class ManagedForm
{
public bool ShowNotifications {get; set;}
public void OnEventNotification(object sender, ...)
{
if (this.ShowNotifications)
{
// show the notification
}
}
Now someone has to know which form should show the notification. This someone should set property ShowNotification.
For instance if only the active ManagedForm should show the notifications then the ManagedForm can decide for itsels:
public OnFormActiveChanged(object sender, ...)
{
this.ShowNotifications = this.Form.IsActive;
}
If all red Forms should show the notifications:
public OnFormBackColorChanged(object sender, ...)
{
this.ShowNotifications = this.Form.BackColor == Color.Red;
}
If you have a lot of Forms, with only a few that show notifications, then a lot events OnShowNotification will be called for nothing, but since this is just a function call it won't be a problem unless you show 1000 forms or so, and I guess in that you have more serious problems.
Summerized
Decide the criterium on which a ManagedForm should show the notifications
Decide when a different form should show the notifications
Create an event handler for when the form changes, let the event handler set property ShowNotification
When the event to show the notification occurs, check the property.
Subscriptions are useful if you actually want these events to propagate to each form, but that doesn't seem like what you want to do. Given any action, your code is needing to show only one dialog box and update the status text of the main form.
Maybe you should consider using a singleton pattern, instead. By using a static event handler, this is essentially what you are already doing.
public class MainAppForm : Form
{
static MainAppForm mainAppForm;
public MainAppForm()
{
mainAppForm = this;
}
public static void NotifyOk(Form sender, string fullMessage = "Ok.", string shortMessage = null)
{
mainAppForm.NotifyOk(sender, fullMessage, shortMessage);
}
public void NotifyOk(Form sender, string fullMessage, string shortMessage)
{
this.statusStrip.Invoke(delegate {
this.statusStrip.Text = shortMessage;
});
}
}

Provide feedback to event caller using writable property in EventArgs

In Dustin Campbell's answer in question Return a value from a Event — is there a Good Practice for this? it is stated that instead of returning data from an event handler, we can have a writable property on a set of custom EventArgs that is passed to the event similar to Cancel property of the WinForms FormClosing event.
How do I provide feedback to event caller using properties in EventArgs?
My specific scenario is that there is a Controller class that does Job A and there are many classes requesting the Job A to be done. Thus, the controller is subscribed to this event on all classes.
I want to give some feedback to the caller that the job is done. The tricky part is that those classes are module-like and controller doesn't know anything about them.
My though is to include that writable property to the delegate of the event in order for the controller to give feedback through it. This property could somehow be invoked using reflection, which is fine in my scenario.
you cannot define properties for delegates.
Also you do not need reflection for such a mechanism.
What you want to do is to define your "return"-properties in the EventArgs-derived class.
A simple such class would be:
public class JobEventArgs : EventArgs {
public bool Done { get; set; }
}
Now you can declare your event in the class as
public event EventHandler<JobEventArgs> Job;
Usage in the method which handles the event:
public void DoJob(object s, JobEventArgs args) {
// do stuff
args.Done = true;
}
and in the event invoking code:
public void FireJobEvent() {
var args = new JobEventArgs();
this.Job(this, args);
if(!args.Done) {
// the job was not handled
}
}
But frankly it rather seems like you want to do a job asynchronously with a notification when it finishes.
Which would result in syntax like..
class Module {
public void JobCompleted(IAsyncResult r) {
if(!r.IsCompleted)
return;
Console.WriteLine("The job has finished.");
}
public void ExecuteJob() {
var job = new EventArgs<JobEventArgs>((s, a) => { this.controller.JobA(); });
job.BeginInvoke(null, null,
r =>
{
this.JobCompleted(r);
if(r.IsCompleted)
job.EndInvoke(r);
}, null);
}
}

Assigning pointer to event for use later

This is abit difficult to word, so I am going to rely mostly on code.
BTW if you can word the question in a better light please dont hesitate giving your 2c!
class CustomEventArgs : EventArgs
{
public delegate void CustomEventHandler( Object sender, CustomEventArgs args );
public int data;
public CustomEventArgs (int _data)
{
data = _data;
}
}
This is the event that we will be using in this example.
class EventGenerator
{
public event CustomEventArgs.CustomEventHandler WeOccasion;
public EventGenerator ()
{
Task.Factory.StartNew( () =>
{
var index = 1;
// just loop and generate events every now and then
while (true)
{
Thread.Sleep( 1000 );
WeOccasion( this, new CustomEventArgs (++index));
}
});
}
}
This class just loops through firing off CustomEventHandler events.
class EventActivity
{
// EventActivity has an event of the same type as EventGenerator's
public event CustomEventArgs.CustomEventHandler WeOccasion;
// this is the part I cant seem to get right
public event CustomEventArgs.CustomEventHandler Source ( get; set; }
public bool Active {
set
{
if (value)
{
Source += DoWork;
}
else
{
Source -= DoWork;
}
}
}
private void DoWork( Object sender, CustomEventArgs frame);
}
Here is where I really need help. I want almost a pointer to an event in an another class of type CustomEventHandler that I can later assign event handlers to when I activate the activity.
Here is a usage example wrapped in a class;
class EventAssigner
{
EventGenerator Generator;
EventActivity DoSomeThing1;
EventActivity DoSomeThing2;
public EventAssigner ()
{
// init
Generator = new EventGenerator();
DoSomeThing1 = new EventActivity();
DoSomeThing2 = new EventActivity();
// assign sources
DoSomeThing1.Source = Generator.WeOccasion;
DoSomeThing2.Source = DoSomeThing1.WeOccasion;
// activate the first activity
DoSomeThing1.Active = true;
}
public void Activate2()
{
// activate the second activity
DoSomeThing2.Active = true;
}
public void Deactivate2()
{
// deactivate the second activity
DoSomeThing2.Active = false;
}
}
Obiously this code doesnt work, and I suppose thats what I am asking. Can you get this design pattern to work?
What you're asking to do isn't really possible with .NET events, and probably isn't as desirable as you might think. A bit of background should help explain why:
Properties have a basic pattern with get and set operations. These are invoked by accessing the property (for a get) and an assignment to the property (for a set):
var x = instance.Prop1; // access
instance.Prop1 = x; // assignment
When you access an event from outside the class (i.e. instance.Event) you are given the "public" face, which, like properties, has two operations: add handler and remove handler. These are invoked using the += and -= operators.
instance.Event += this.Handler; // add
instance.Event -= this.Handler; // remove
The important thing to notice that it doesn't have a "get" operation - there is no way to get a reference to the event outside the class; you can only modify the handlers registered.
When you access an event from within a class, you are given the "private" face, which is essentially a special collection of delegates (function pointers) to the registered event handlers. When you invoke the delegate, you're actually asking the framework to iterate through the registered event handlers and invoke those.
if(this.Event != null)
{
this.Event.Invoke(e, args); // raise event
}
This separation of public face and private face is what allows you have a nice simple event keyword which magically gives you an event. It is also what stops you passing a reference to the event around.
To pass the event into registration methods, you have to pass the object the event is attached to. If you have multiple classes which implement the same event and you want to register them all in the same way, you should have them implement an interface with the event (yes, events can be on interfaces) and write your method to accept the interface as an argument.
If I'm reading you correct, you want the line
DoSomeThing1.Source = Generator.WeOccasion;
to save the pointer to the WeOccasion event, so that you can add the DoWork call to it later, right?
I don't think that is possible with "normal" code, as the event is not a value, but rather like a property. Consider the following analogous code:
myProp = aPerson.Name; // attempt to save the name property for later
myProp = "Fred"; // intent is to set aPerson.Name = "Fred"
If you want this to work I'd suggest using reflection to find the event, and add to it using the EventInfo.AddEventHandler method (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.reflection.eventinfo.addeventhandler.aspx)

How to ensure an event is only subscribed to once

I would like to ensure that I only subscribe once in a particular class for an event on an instance.
For example I would like to be able to do the following:
if (*not already subscribed*)
{
member.Event += new MemeberClass.Delegate(handler);
}
How would I go about implementing such a guard?
I'm adding this in all the duplicate questions, just for the record. This pattern worked for me:
myClass.MyEvent -= MyHandler;
myClass.MyEvent += MyHandler;
Note that doing this every time you register your handler will ensure that your handler is registered only once.
If you are talking about an event on a class that you have access to the source for then you could place the guard in the event definition.
private bool _eventHasSubscribers = false;
private EventHandler<MyDelegateType> _myEvent;
public event EventHandler<MyDelegateType> MyEvent
{
add
{
if (_myEvent == null)
{
_myEvent += value;
}
}
remove
{
_myEvent -= value;
}
}
That would ensure that only one subscriber can subscribe to the event on this instance of the class that provides the event.
EDIT please see comments about why the above code is a bad idea and not thread safe.
If your problem is that a single instance of the client is subscribing more than once (and you need multiple subscribers) then the client code is going to need to handle that. So replace
not already subscribed
with a bool member of the client class that gets set when you subscribe for the event the first time.
Edit (after accepted): Based on the comment from #Glen T (the submitter of the question) the code for the accepted solution he went with is in the client class:
if (alreadySubscribedFlag)
{
member.Event += new MemeberClass.Delegate(handler);
}
Where alreadySubscribedFlag is a member variable in the client class that tracks first subscription to the specific event.
People looking at the first code snippet here, please take note of #Rune's comment - it is not a good idea to change the behavior of subscribing to an event in a non-obvious way.
EDIT 31/7/2009: Please see comments from #Sam Saffron. As I already stated and Sam agrees the first method presented here is not a sensible way to modify the behavior of the event subscription. The consumers of the class need to know about its internal implementation to understand its behavior. Not very nice.
#Sam Saffron also comments about thread safety. I'm assuming that he is referring to the possible race condition where two subscribers (close to) simultaneously attempt to subscribe and they may both end up subscribing. A lock could be used to improve this. If you are planning to change the way event subscription works then I advise that you read about how to make the subscription add/remove properties thread safe.
As others have shown, you can override the add/remove properties of the event. Alternatively, you may want to ditch the event and simply have the class take a delegate as an argument in its constructor (or some other method), and instead of firing the event, call the supplied delegate.
Events imply that anyone can subscribe to them, whereas a delegate is one method you can pass to the class. Will probably be less surprising to the user of your library then, if you only use events when you actually want the one-to-many semantics it usually offers.
You can use Postsharper to write one attribute just once and use it on normal Events. Reuse the code. Code sample is given below.
[Serializable]
public class PreventEventHookedTwiceAttribute: EventInterceptionAspect
{
private readonly object _lockObject = new object();
readonly List<Delegate> _delegates = new List<Delegate>();
public override void OnAddHandler(EventInterceptionArgs args)
{
lock(_lockObject)
{
if(!_delegates.Contains(args.Handler))
{
_delegates.Add(args.Handler);
args.ProceedAddHandler();
}
}
}
public override void OnRemoveHandler(EventInterceptionArgs args)
{
lock(_lockObject)
{
if(_delegates.Contains(args.Handler))
{
_delegates.Remove(args.Handler);
args.ProceedRemoveHandler();
}
}
}
}
Just use it like this.
[PreventEventHookedTwice]
public static event Action<string> GoodEvent;
For details, look at Implement Postsharp EventInterceptionAspect to prevent an event Handler hooked twice
You would either need to store a separate flag indicating whether or not you'd subscribed or, if you have control over MemberClass, provide implementations of the add and remove methods for the event:
class MemberClass
{
private EventHandler _event;
public event EventHandler Event
{
add
{
if( /* handler not already added */ )
{
_event+= value;
}
}
remove
{
_event-= value;
}
}
}
To decide whether or not the handler has been added you'll need to compare the Delegates returned from GetInvocationList() on both _event and value.
I know this is an old Question, but the current Answers didn't work for me.
Looking at C# pattern to prevent an event handler hooked twice (labelled as a duplicate of this question), gives Answers that are closer, but still didn't work, possibly because of multi-threading causing the new event object to be different or maybe because I was using a custom event class. I ended up with a similar solution to the accepted Answer to the above Question.
private EventHandler<bar> foo;
public event EventHandler<bar> Foo
{
add
{
if (foo == null ||
!foo.GetInvocationList().Select(il => il.Method).Contains(value.Method))
{
foo += value;
}
}
remove
{
if (foo != null)
{
EventHandler<bar> eventMethod = (EventHandler<bar>)foo .GetInvocationList().FirstOrDefault(il => il.Method == value.Method);
if (eventMethod != null)
{
foo -= eventMethod;
}
}
}
}
With this, you'll also have to fire your event with foo.Invoke(...) instead of Foo.Invoke(...). You'll also need to include System.Linq, if you aren't already using it.
This solution isn't exactly pretty, but it works.
I did this recently and I'll just drop it here so it stays:
private bool subscribed;
if(!subscribed)
{
myClass.MyEvent += MyHandler;
subscribed = true;
}
private void MyHandler()
{
// Do stuff
myClass.MyEvent -= MyHandler;
subscribed = false;
}
Invoke only distinct elements from GetInvocationList while raising:
using System.Linq;
....
public event HandlerType SomeEvent;
....
//Raising code
foreach (HandlerType d in (SomeEvent?.GetInvocationList().Distinct() ?? Enumerable.Empty<Delegate>()).ToArray())
d.Invoke(sender, arg);
Example unit test:
class CA
{
public CA()
{ }
public void Inc()
=> count++;
public int count;
}
[TestMethod]
public void TestDistinctDelegates()
{
var a = new CA();
Action d0 = () => a.Inc();
var d = d0;
d += () => a.Inc();
d += d0;
d.Invoke();
Assert.AreEqual(3, a.count);
var l = d.GetInvocationList();
Assert.AreEqual(3, l.Length);
var distinct = l.Distinct().ToArray();
Assert.AreEqual(2, distinct.Length);
foreach (Action di in distinct)
di.Invoke();
Assert.AreEqual(3 + distinct.Length, a.count);
}
[TestMethod]
public void TestDistinctDelegates2()
{
var a = new CA();
Action d = a.Inc;
d += a.Inc;
d.Invoke();
Assert.AreEqual(2, a.count);
var distinct = d.GetInvocationList().Distinct().ToArray();
Assert.AreEqual(1, distinct.Length);
foreach (Action di in distinct)
di.Invoke();
Assert.AreEqual(3, a.count);
}

Categories

Resources