Develop Reference

Replace 'BackgroundWorker' With 'Thread '

I want to replace BackgroundWorker in my winform application with a Thread.
The goal is do the the jobs in a new thread other than UI-thread & prevent program hang during run.
So i did this :
private void radBtn_start_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
try
{
string thread_name = "trd_" + rnd.Next(99000, 10000000).ToString();
Thread thread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(Thread_Method));
thread.Name = thread_name;
thread.Start();
}
catch (System.Exception ex)
{
MessageBox.Show("Error in radBtn_start_Click() Is : " + ex.ToString());
}
}
public void Thread_Method()
{
...Some Jobs
Thread.Sleep(20000);
...Some Jobs After Delay
Thread.Sleep(20000);
...Some Jobs After Delay
this.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate
{
radTextBoxControl1.Text += DateTime.Now.ToString() + " : We are at end of search( " + radDropDownList1.SelectedItem.Tag + " ) = -1" + Environment.NewLine;
}));
}
But after running these codes UI hangs during sleep.
What is the correct codes for my purpose?

You don't have to create a new Thread, your process already has a pool of threads anxiously waiting to do something for you
Usually the threads in the thread pool are used when you use async-await. However, you can also use them for heavy calculations
My advice is to make your thread_method async. This has the advantage, that whenever your thread_method has to wait idly for another process to finish, like writing data to a file, fetching items from a database, or reading information from the internet, the thread is available for the thread pool to do other tasks.
If you are not familiar with async-await: this interview with Eric Lippert really helped me to understand what happens when you use async-await. Search somewhere in the middle for async-await.
One of the nice things about async-await, is that the executing thread has the same "context" as the UI-thread, so this thread can access UI-elements. No need to check for InvokeRequired or to call Invoke.
To make your ThreadMethod async:
declare it async
instead of TResults return Task<TResult>; instead of void return Task
only exception: async event handlers return void
whenever you call other methods that have an async version, call this async version, start awaiting when you need the results of the async task.
public async Task FetchCustomerAddress(int customerId)
{
// fetch the customer address from the database:
using (var dbContext = new OrderDbContext(...))
{
return await dbContext.Customers
.Where(customer => customer.Id == customerId)
.Select(customer => new Address
{
Name = customer.Name,
Street = customer.Street,
... // etc
})
.FirstOrDefaultAsync();
}
}
public async Task CreateCustomerOrder(
int customerId, IEnumerable orderLines)
{
// start reading the customer Address
var taskReadCustomerAddress = this.FetchCustomerAddress(customerId);
// meanwhile create the order
CustomerOrder order = new CustomerOrder();
foreach (var orderLine in orderLines)
{
order.OrderLines.Add(orderLine);
}
order.CalculateTotal();
// now you need the address of the customer: await:
Address customerAddress = await taskReadCustomerAddress;
order.Address = customerAddress;
return order;
}
Sometimes you don't have to wait idly for another process to finish, but you need to do some heavy calculations, and still keep your UI-thread responsive. In older applications you would use the BackgroundWorker for this, in newer applications you use Task.StartNew
For instance, you have a button, and a menu item that both will start some heavy calculations. Just like when using the backgroundworker you want to show some progress. While doing the calculations, both the menu item and the button need to be disable.
public async Task PrintCustomerOrdersAsync(
ICollection<CustomerOrderInformation> customerOrders)
{
// while creating the customer orders: disable the button and the menu items
this.buttonPrintOrders.Enabled = false;
this.menuItemCreateOrderLines.Enabled = false;
// show the progress bar
this.ProgressBarCalculating.MinValue = 0;
this.ProgressBarCalculating.MaxValue = customers.Count;
this.ProgressBarCalculating.Value = 0;
this.ProgressBarCalculating.Visible = true;
List<Task<PrintJob>> printJobs = new List<Task<PrintJob>>();
foreach (CustomerOrderInformation orderInformation in customerOrders)
{
// instead of BackGroundworker raise event, you can access the UI items yourself
CustomerOrder order = this.CreateCustomerOrder(orderInformation.CustomerId,
orderInformation.OrderLines);
this.ProgressBarCalculating.Value +=1;
// print the Order, do not await until printing finished, create next order
printJobs.Add(this.Print(order));
}
// all orders created and sent to the printer. await until all print jobs complete:
await Task.WhenAll(printJobs);
// cleanup:
this.buttonPrintOrders.Enabled = true;
this.menuItemCreateOrderLines.Enabled = true;
this.ProgressBarCalculating.Visible = false;
}
By the way: in a proper design, you would separate the enabling / disabling the items from the actual processing:
public async Task PrintCustomerOrdersAsync(ICollection<CustomerOrderInformation> customerOrders)
{
this.ShowBusyPrintingOrders(customerOrders.Count);
await this.PrintOrdersAsync(customerOrders);
this.HideBusyPrintingOrders();
}
Now to start printing the orders when a button is pressed, there are two possibilities:
If the process is mostly waiting for others: async event handler
If there are really heavy calculations (longer than a second?): start a task that does the calculations
No heavy calculations:
// async event handler has void return value!
private async void ButtonPrintOrdersClickedAsync(object sender, ...)
{
var orderInformations = this.GetOrderInformations();
await PrintCustomerOrdersAsync(orderInformations);
}
Because I don't have anything other useful to do, I await immediately
Heavy calculations: start a separate task:
private async Task ButtonCalculateClickedAsync(object sender, ...)
{
var calculationTask = Task.Run(() => this.DoHeavyCalculations(this.textBox1.Text);
// because you didn't await, you are free to do something else,
// for instance show progress:
while (!calculationTask.Complete)
{
// await one second; UI is responsive!
await Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1));
this.ProgressBar.Value += 1;
}
}
Be aware: using these methods, you can't stop the process. So you are in trouble if the operator wants to close the application while you are still printing.
Just like your background thread, every method that supports cancellation should regularly check if cancellation is requested. The advantage is, that this checking is also done in the .NET methods that support cancellation, like reading database information, writing a file, etc. The backgroundWorker couldn't cancel writing to a file.
For this we have the CancellationTokenSource
private CancellationTokenSource cancellationTokenSource;
private Task taskPrintOrders;
public async Task PrintCustomerOrdersAsync(ICollection<CustomerOrderInformation> customerOrders)
{
this.ShowBusyPrintingOrders(customerOrders.Count);
using (this.cancellactionTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource())
{
taskPrintOrders = this.PrintOrdersAsync(customerOrders, this.cancellationTokenSource.Token);
await taskPrintOrders;
this.HideBusyPrintingOrders();
}
private void CancelPrinting()
{
this.cancellationTokenSource?.Cancel();
}
If you want to cancel and wait until finished, for instance when closing the form:
private bool TaskStillRunning => this.TaskPrinting != null && !this.TaskPrinting.Complete;
private async void OnFormClosing(object sender, ...)
{
if (this.TaskStillRunning)
{
bool canClose = this.AskIfCanClose();
if (!canClose)
eventArgs.Cancel = true;
else
{
// continue closing: stop the task, and wait until stopped
this.CancelPrinting();
await this.taskPrintOrders;
}
}
}

This will work in separate thread without hanging your UI.
Use new Thread
new Thread(delegate()
{
Thread_Method();
}).Start();
or Task.run
Task.Run(() =>
{
Thread_Method();
});

How to ensure a single active Task is always killed and replaced on each call to the method that starts the Task.Run?

How can I ensure a single active Task is always killed and replaced on each call to the method that starts the Task.Run?
The idea is to only ever have 1 future notification waiting to be shown (last caller's), no matter how many times the method (SetFutureNotification) is called (or how rapidly).
When debugging and calling the method (rapidly), let's say, 5 times, I am seeing very odd results.
For example: The 2nd callers Task is running and the subsequent callers tasks are cancelled (exited).
The expected behavior is for the last caller's Task to be running (5th caller) and all previous callers Task's cancelled (exited).
By placing a small delay between each of the 5 test calls (500ms), I get the desired result, however I am wanting to learn the correct approach.
public static class NotificationsHelper
{
private static CancellationTokenSource _cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
// Set Future Notification (From outside this class).
// If called multiple times, the existing task should be killed and a new task replaces it.
public static void SetFutureNotification(string notificationText, DateTime notificationDateTime, Action<string> notificationAction)
{
CancelNotification();
_cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
Task.Run(async () =>
{
while (!_cts.Token.IsCancellationRequested)
{
await Task.Delay(1000, _cts.Token);
if (DateTime.Now > notificationDateTime)
{
notificationAction?.Invoke(notificationText);
_cts.Cancel();
}
}
}, _cts.Token);
}
// Cancel Active Future Notification (From outside this class).
public static void CancelNotification()
{
if (_cts != null && _cts.Token != null && _cts.Token.CanBeCanceled == true)
{
_cts.Cancel();
}
}
}
Edit:
I reformatted my code to test the proposed answer by Oleg (below) by adding an Id to keep track of the tasks. This confirmed the desired result:
public static class NotificationsHelper
{
private static int _counter = 0;
private static CancellationTokenSource _cts;
// Set Future Notification (From Anywhere).
// If called multiple times, the existing task should be killed and a new task replaces it.
public static void SetFutureNotification(string notificationText, DateTime notificationDateTime, Action<string> notificationAction)
{
_counter += 1;
var id = _counter.ToString();
Console.WriteLine("Method Called: " + id);
CancelNotification();
_cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var cts = _cts; // I'm local cts and will be captured by one task only
Task.Run(async () =>
{
while (!cts.Token.IsCancellationRequested)
{
await Task.Delay(1000, cts.Token);
if (DateTime.Now > notificationDateTime)
{
notificationAction?.Invoke(notificationText);
cts.Cancel();
}
Console.WriteLine("Task active: " + id);
}
}, cts.Token).ContinueWith(t => { Console.WriteLine("Task exited: " + id); });
}
// Cancel Notification (From Anywhere).
public static void CancelNotification()
{
if (_cts != null && _cts.Token != null && _cts.Token.CanBeCanceled == true)
{
_cts.Cancel();
}
}
}

It looks your intention was to cancel every task before starting new one, and its done almost right - the problem is that every task captures and checks same member variable _cts that all tasks share. Even though you new it for every notification, after your delay (1000) all of them are aware of only last one you've created. What you need is to have every task to have own copy of cancellation token, the one you would be cancelling on every subsequent task:
public static void SetFutureNotification(string notificationText, DateTime notificationDateTime, Action<string> notificationAction)
{
CancelNotification();
_cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var cts = _cts; // I'm local cts and will be captured by one task only
Task.Run(async () =>
{
while (!cts.Token.IsCancellationRequested)
{
await Task.Delay(1000, cts.Token);
if (DateTime.Now > notificationDateTime)
{
notificationAction?.Invoke(notificationText);
cts.Cancel();
}
}
}, cts.Token);
}
Now, your cancellation routine (that does not need a change) will be canceling the last task created, and only last task would know about it

Your problem is that the cancelling the CancellationToken will signal only that a cancellation is required to the background task. However that task will continue to run for a certain amount of time, up to a point where the CancellationToken is checked and the cancellation is processed.
If you want to make sure the task is fully cancelled, you need to wait for it to finish after you cancel the token:
// When starting the task:
_currentTask = Task.Run(async () => ...);
// in Cancel method:
if (_cts != null && _cts.Token != null && _cts.Token.CanBeCanceled == true)
{
_cts.Cancel();
// Wait for the background task to finish.
// Maybe with a try/catch block around it, because it might throw a
// Cancellation exception
await _currentTask;
_cts = null;
_currentTask = null;
}
This should work if you always start and try to cancel background tasks from the same thread (e.g. UI thread). If these operations happen from different threads, you might also need to protect _cts and _currentTask, e.g. with an awaitable Mutex.
If you don't care about whether the background task is still running, and just want to let it finish at some point of time, then the approach outlined by Oleg Bogdanov with capturing the current CancellationToken in the background task will also work.

C# How to await async task until it indicates to proceed

I have a C# method, which calls an external web service multiple times, in a loop. I need to call it asynchronously in a different thread.
But the caller process MUST wait until the async thread meets a certain condition, - this condition occurs much before the loop iterations complete.
Please suggest a C# code example which describes how to wait until the async block of code indicates that a certain condition has been met, so that the main process can proceed without waiting for loop to finish.
My code:
..
List<MyObject> objList = GetObjects();
int counter = 0;
await Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
{
foreach (MyObject obj in objList)
{
counter++;
CallExtWebSvc(obj);
if (counter == 1)
{
// return an indication that main process can proceed.
}
}
});
// Do other stuff...

You could execute your method as fire and forget and then wait for a TaskCompletionSource. This TaskCompletionSource is given to the method that calls the webservice as parameter. The method then sets a result on the TaskCompletionSource at some point.
Here is an example code piece:
public async Task DoWebserviceStuffAsync(TaskCompletionSource<bool> taskCompletionSource)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
//your webservice call
await Task.Delay(5000);
//some condition
if (i == 1)
{
//after setting this your CallingMethod finishes
//waiting the await taskCompletionSource.Task;
taskCompletionSource.TrySetResult(true);
}
}
}
private async Task CallerMethod()
{
var taskCompletionSource = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>();
//call method without await
//care: You cannot catch exceptions without await
DoWebserviceStuffAsync(taskCompletionSource);
//wait for the DoWebserviceStuffAsync to set a result on the passed TaskCompletionSource
await taskCompletionSource.Task;
}

If you want to avoid the danger of "fire and forget" or you also need to wait for the full operation to complete, you could return two tasks (Task,Task) (C# v7 syntax). The caller would await both tasks in order.
public async Task Caller()
{
var (partOne,partTwo) = DoSomethingAsync();
await partOne;
//part one is done...
await partTwo;
//part two is done...
}
public (Task,Task) DoSomethingAsync()
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>(TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously);
return (tcs.Task, DoWork(tcs));
}
public async Task DoWork(TaskCompletionSource<bool> tcs)
{
List<MyObject> objList = GetObjects();
int counter = 0;
await Task.Run(() =>
{
foreach (MyObject obj in objList)
{
counter++;
CallExtWebSvc(obj);
if (counter == 1)
{
// return an indication that main process can proceed.
tcs.SetResult(true);
}
}
});
// Do other stuff...
}

Creating and starting a task on the UI thread

When a method that gets called on a worker thread needs to run code on the UI thread and wait for it to complete before doing something else, it can be done like this:
public int RunOnUi(Func<int> f)
{
int res = Application.Current.Dispatcher.Invoke(f);
return res;
}
But what if I wanted to do it with tasks? Is there a way for the RunOnUi method to create a task that is started on the UI and return it so that the caller (which runs on a worker thread) can wait for it? Something that will fit the following signature: public Task<int> StartOnUi(Func<int> f) ?
One way to do it is as follows:
public Task<int> RunOnUi(Func<int> f)
{
var task = new Task<int>(f);
task.Start(_scheduler);
return task;
}
Here, assume that _schduler holds the ui TaskScheduler. But I am not too comfortable with creating "cold" tasks and using the start method to run them. Is that the "recommended" way or is there a more elegant way to do it?

Just use InvokeAsync instead of Invoke then return the Task<int> inside the DispatcherOperation<int> the function returns.
//Coding conventions say async functions should end with the word Async.
public Task<int> RunOnUiAsync(Func<int> f)
{
var dispatcherOperation = Application.Current.Dispatcher.InvokeAsync(f);
return dispatcherOperation.Task;
}
If you do not have access to .NET 4.5 it is a little more complicated. You will need to use BeginInvoke and a TaskCompletionSource to wrap the DispaterOperation that BeginInvoke returns
public Task<int> RunOnUi(Func<int> f)
{
var operation = Application.Current.Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(f);
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<int>();
operation.Aborted += (sender, args) => tcs.TrySetException(new SomeExecptionHere());
operation.Completed += (sender, args) => tcs.TrySetResult((int)operation.Result);
//The operation may have already finished and this check accounts for
//the race condition where neither of the events will ever be called
//because the events where raised before you subscribed.
var status = operation.Status;
if (status == DispatcherOperationStatus.Completed)
{
tcs.TrySetResult((int)operation.Result);
}
else if (status == DispatcherOperationStatus.Aborted)
{
tcs.TrySetException(new SomeExecptionHere());
}
return tcs.Task;
}

A pattern for self-cancelling and restarting task

Is there a recommended established pattern for self-cancelling and restarting tasks?
E.g., I'm working on the API for background spellchecker. The spellcheck session is wrapped as Task. Every new session should cancel the previous one and wait for its termination (to properly re-use the resources like spellcheck service provider, etc).
I've come up with something like this:
class Spellchecker
{
Task pendingTask = null; // pending session
CancellationTokenSource cts = null; // CTS for pending session
// SpellcheckAsync is called by the client app
public async Task<bool> SpellcheckAsync(CancellationToken token)
{
// SpellcheckAsync can be re-entered
var previousCts = this.cts;
var newCts = CancellationTokenSource.CreateLinkedTokenSource(token);
this.cts = newCts;
if (IsPendingSession())
{
// cancel the previous session and wait for its termination
if (!previousCts.IsCancellationRequested)
previousCts.Cancel();
// this is not expected to throw
// as the task is wrapped with ContinueWith
await this.pendingTask;
}
newCts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
var newTask = SpellcheckAsyncHelper(newCts.Token);
this.pendingTask = newTask.ContinueWith((t) => {
this.pendingTask = null;
// we don't need to know the result here, just log the status
Debug.Print(((object)t.Exception ?? (object)t.Status).ToString());
}, TaskContinuationOptions.ExecuteSynchronously);
return await newTask;
}
// the actual task logic
async Task<bool> SpellcheckAsyncHelper(CancellationToken token)
{
// do not start a new session if the the previous one still pending
if (IsPendingSession())
throw new ApplicationException("Cancel the previous session first.");
// do the work (pretty much IO-bound)
try
{
bool doMore = true;
while (doMore)
{
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
await Task.Delay(500); // placeholder to call the provider
}
return doMore;
}
finally
{
// clean-up the resources
}
}
public bool IsPendingSession()
{
return this.pendingTask != null &&
!this.pendingTask.IsCompleted &&
!this.pendingTask.IsCanceled &&
!this.pendingTask.IsFaulted;
}
}
The client app (the UI) should just be able to call SpellcheckAsync as many times as desired, without worrying about cancelling a pending session. The main doMore loop runs on the UI thread (as it involves the UI, while all spellcheck service provider calls are IO-bound).
I feel a bit uncomfortable about the fact that I had to split the API into two peices, SpellcheckAsync and SpellcheckAsyncHelper, but I can't think of a better way of doing this, and it's yet to be tested.

I think the general concept is pretty good, though I recommend you not use ContinueWith.
I'd just write it using regular await, and a lot of the "am I already running" logic is not necessary:
Task pendingTask = null; // pending session
CancellationTokenSource cts = null; // CTS for pending session
// SpellcheckAsync is called by the client app on the UI thread
public async Task<bool> SpellcheckAsync(CancellationToken token)
{
// SpellcheckAsync can be re-entered
var previousCts = this.cts;
var newCts = CancellationTokenSource.CreateLinkedTokenSource(token);
this.cts = newCts;
if (previousCts != null)
{
// cancel the previous session and wait for its termination
previousCts.Cancel();
try { await this.pendingTask; } catch { }
}
newCts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
this.pendingTask = SpellcheckAsyncHelper(newCts.Token);
return await this.pendingTask;
}
// the actual task logic
async Task<bool> SpellcheckAsyncHelper(CancellationToken token)
{
// do the work (pretty much IO-bound)
using (...)
{
bool doMore = true;
while (doMore)
{
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
await Task.Delay(500); // placeholder to call the provider
}
return doMore;
}
}

Here's the most recent version of the cancel-and-restart pattern that I use:
class AsyncWorker
{
Task _pendingTask;
CancellationTokenSource _pendingTaskCts;
// the actual worker task
async Task DoWorkAsync(CancellationToken token)
{
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
Debug.WriteLine("Start.");
await Task.Delay(100, token);
Debug.WriteLine("Done.");
}
// start/restart
public void Start(CancellationToken token)
{
var previousTask = _pendingTask;
var previousTaskCts = _pendingTaskCts;
var thisTaskCts = CancellationTokenSource.CreateLinkedTokenSource(token);
_pendingTask = null;
_pendingTaskCts = thisTaskCts;
// cancel the previous task
if (previousTask != null && !previousTask.IsCompleted)
previousTaskCts.Cancel();
Func<Task> runAsync = async () =>
{
// await the previous task (cancellation requested)
if (previousTask != null)
await previousTask.WaitObservingCancellationAsync();
// if there's a newer task started with Start, this one should be cancelled
thisTaskCts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
await DoWorkAsync(thisTaskCts.Token).WaitObservingCancellationAsync();
};
_pendingTask = Task.Factory.StartNew(
runAsync,
CancellationToken.None,
TaskCreationOptions.None,
TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext()).Unwrap();
}
// stop
public void Stop()
{
if (_pendingTask == null)
return;
if (_pendingTask.IsCanceled)
return;
if (_pendingTask.IsFaulted)
_pendingTask.Wait(); // instantly throw an exception
if (!_pendingTask.IsCompleted)
{
// still running, request cancellation
if (!_pendingTaskCts.IsCancellationRequested)
_pendingTaskCts.Cancel();
// wait for completion
if (System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState() == ApartmentState.MTA)
{
// MTA, blocking wait
_pendingTask.WaitObservingCancellation();
}
else
{
// TODO: STA, async to sync wait bridge with DoEvents,
// similarly to Thread.Join
}
}
}
}
// useful extensions
public static class Extras
{
// check if exception is OperationCanceledException
public static bool IsOperationCanceledException(this Exception ex)
{
if (ex is OperationCanceledException)
return true;
var aggEx = ex as AggregateException;
return aggEx != null && aggEx.InnerException is OperationCanceledException;
}
// wait asynchrnously for the task to complete and observe exceptions
public static async Task WaitObservingCancellationAsync(this Task task)
{
try
{
await task;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// rethrow if anything but OperationCanceledException
if (!ex.IsOperationCanceledException())
throw;
}
}
// wait for the task to complete and observe exceptions
public static void WaitObservingCancellation(this Task task)
{
try
{
task.Wait();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// rethrow if anything but OperationCanceledException
if (!ex.IsOperationCanceledException())
throw;
}
}
}
Test use (producing only a single "Start/Done" output for DoWorkAsync):
private void MainForm_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var worker = new AsyncWorker();
for (var i = 0; i < 10; i++)
worker.Start(CancellationToken.None);
}

Hope this will be useful - tried to create Helper class which can be re-used:
class SelfCancelRestartTask
{
private Task _task = null;
public CancellationTokenSource TokenSource { get; set; } = null;
public SelfCancelRestartTask()
{
}
public async Task Run(Action operation)
{
if (this._task != null &&
!this._task.IsCanceled &&
!this._task.IsCompleted &&
!this._task.IsFaulted)
{
TokenSource?.Cancel();
await this._task;
TokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
}
else
{
TokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
}
this._task = Task.Run(operation, TokenSource.Token);
}

The examples above seem to have problems when the asynchronous method is called multiple times quickly after each other, for example four times. Then all subsequent calls of this method cancel the first task and in the end three new tasks are generated which run at the same time. So I came up with this:
private List<Tuple<Task, CancellationTokenSource>> _parameterExtractionTasks = new List<Tuple<Task, CancellationTokenSource>>();
/// <remarks>This method is asynchronous, i.e. it runs partly in the background. As this method might be called multiple times
/// quickly after each other, a mechanism has been implemented that <b>all</b> tasks from previous method calls are first canceled before the task is started anew.</remarks>
public async void ParameterExtraction() {
CancellationTokenSource newCancellationTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
// Define the task which shall run in the background.
Task newTask = new Task(() => {
// do some work here
}
}
}, newCancellationTokenSource.Token);
_parameterExtractionTasks.Add(new Tuple<Task, CancellationTokenSource>(newTask, newCancellationTokenSource));
/* Convert the list to arrays as an exception is thrown if the number of entries in a list changes while
* we are in a for loop. This can happen if this method is called again while we are waiting for a task. */
Task[] taskArray = _parameterExtractionTasks.ConvertAll(item => item.Item1).ToArray();
CancellationTokenSource[] tokenSourceArray = _parameterExtractionTasks.ConvertAll(item => item.Item2).ToArray();
for (int i = 0; i < taskArray.Length - 1; i++) { // -1: the last task, i.e. the most recent task, shall be run and not canceled.
// Cancel all running tasks which were started by previous calls of this method
if (taskArray[i].Status == TaskStatus.Running) {
tokenSourceArray[i].Cancel();
await taskArray[i]; // wait till the canceling completed
}
}
// Get the most recent task
Task currentThreadToRun = taskArray[taskArray.Length - 1];
// Start this task if, but only if it has not been started before (i.e. if it is still in Created state).
if (currentThreadToRun.Status == TaskStatus.Created) {
currentThreadToRun.Start();
await currentThreadToRun; // wait till this task is completed.
}
// Now the task has been completed once. Thus we can recent the list of tasks to cancel or maybe run.
_parameterExtractionTasks = new List<Tuple<Task, CancellationTokenSource>>();
}