Develop Reference

Status Listbox update problem using a Background Worker in C#

I'm trying to use a background worker to update a listbox used for a status window in my Form in C#. It doesn't appear to work properly when the addToStausLog() method is called from another class outside of the MyForm class even though I pass an instance of the form to the other class that's calling the addToStatusLog update member. Instead the update doesn't happen until the class member finished and returns back to the MyForm class. Maybe there's a better a approach to creating real-time status windows that will run from any class that MyForm is passed into. I'm new to worker threads, so could someone review and let me know what I might be doing wrong or could improve on.
public MyForm()
{
InitializeComponent();
// Setup background task to update listbox status so UI is unaffected
_lListBoxQue = new List<string>();
bw_listBoxBGWorker = new BackgroundWorker();
bw_listBoxBGWorker.DoWork += (o, args) => LstbxThread_doWork();
bw_listBoxBGWorker.RunWorkerCompleted += (o, args) => LstbxThread_completed();
}
private void LstbxThread_doWork()
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(100);
}
private void LstbxThread_completed()
{
// Update listbox
lstStatusBox.BeginUpdate();
lstStatusBox.Items.Clear(); // clear entries
lstStatusBox.Items.AddRange(_lListBoxQue.ToArray());
lstStatusBox.EndUpdate();
}
public String addToStatusLog(String sMsg)
{
_lListBoxQue.Add(sMsg);
if (_lListBoxQue.Count > _iStatusLogMaxLines) // > max?
_lListBoxQue.RemoveAt(0); // remove top element?
if( !bw_listBoxBGWorker.IsBusy ) // background not busy?
bw_listBoxBGWorker.RunWorkerAsync(); // update listbox in back ground task
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(100);
return sMsg;
}
This is the member that calls another class which attempts to call the addToStatusLog several times during the process, but the updates to the listbox don't happen until the MyClass(this).updateDB() finishes. I need to see real-time updates as the updateDB() function is running. There has to be a way to make this work, I'm hoping...
private void btnUpdateDB_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (_bIsUpdateEventRunning == false ) // is event not busy?
{
_bIsUpdateEventRunning = true;
new MyClass(this).updateDB();
_bIsUpdateEventRunning = false;
}
}
Example of class called to update the form listbox.
Public class MyClass{
private MyForm _pForm;
public MyClass(MyForm pForm){ _pForm= pForm; }
public void updateDB(){
_pForm.addToStatusLog("Hello World");
}
}
Updated Fix w/o background worker:
public String addToStatusLog(String sMsg)
{
_lListBoxQue.Add(sMsg);
if (_lListBoxQue.Count > _iStatusLogMaxLines) // > max?
_lListBoxQue.RemoveAt(0); // remove top element?
lstStatusBox.BeginUpdate();
lstStatusBox.Items.Clear(); // clear entries
lstStatusBox.Items.AddRange(_lListBoxQue.ToArray());
lstStatusBox.EndUpdate();
Application.DoEvents();
return sMsg;
}

Thread.Sleep is not the answer here. What you likely need is Application.DoEvents. This processes all messages currently waiting in the Windows message queue.
Thread.Sleep just tells the thread to go to sleep for the number of milliseconds you specify. If your background worker is running on the UI thread, you're putting the UI thread to sleep and it's effectively comatose. (Important: All Windows forms run on the UI thread.)
There are, of course, alternative designs that involve spinning up separate threads of execution. But these have their own issues, and you should be mindful of them before running blindly down that path.

Background worker in windows form application

I have the following constellation:
MainForm.cs -> Including all my Form Elements
Program.cs -> includes the main part, which is a xmlreader/writer to alter xml attributes in xml files that can be as large as 4gb
So this little app works but of course the UI gets unresponsive and freezes which I want to avoid, I also hope to reduce the duration of this process on the way
I start the call of my xmlread/write method from a BtnClick event:
void BtnApplyChangesClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Program p = Program.Instance;
pbApplyChanges.Minimum = 0;
pbApplyChanges.Step = 1;
Cursor.Current = Cursors.WaitCursor;
foreach(DataGridViewRow cr in dataGridView2.Rows)
{
pbApplyChanges.Maximum = dataGridView2.Rows.Count;
p.changeElements(cr.Cells["Filename"].Value.ToString(), txtTenant.Text, txtDate.Text, txtEvtId2.Text);
pbApplyChanges.PerformStep();
}
Cursor.Current = Cursors.Arrow;
MessageBox.Show("Job done");
}
In the call I use my singleton instance of Program.cs and my main Method there (changeElements) uses 4 String params, that are all taken from information in the Form! (I suppose this is kinda bad practice but it worked so far...)
When I tried to replace this method call with a backgroundWorker (itself made the method call then) I failed as the method call wasn't even made... I found out that UI elements can't be accessed from the BW thread, so I suppose this is also the reason for my method call not working?!
So how can I get this constellation to work? Do I have to pass all 4 string Params AND the class instance (of Program.cs) to the background worker? Is BW even the best tool for the job?

In general the BackgroundWorker shouldn't access any UI-Elements. It's an old advice in Winforms that accessing UI-Elements should just happen from the UI-Thread.
You can use the Background-Worker like this:
private void Main(string[] args)
{
BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
bw.DoWork += Bw_DoWork;
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += Bw_RunWorkerCompleted;
//Parameter you need to work in Background-Thread for example your strings
string[] param = new[] {"Text1", "Text2", "Text3", "Text4"};
//Start work
bw.RunWorkerAsync(param);
}
//Do your Background-Work
private void Bw_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
string[] param = e.Argument as string[];
//Process your long running task
e.Result = null; //Set your Result of the long running task
}
//Taking your results
private void Bw_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
//Apply your Results to your GUI-Elements
myTextBox1.Text = e.Result.ToString();
}
Background-Worker is some old school stuff by the way, so if you like to learn something new take a look here and inform yourself about the TPL. This gives you a better handling of asynchronous.
In fact I think it's not really good to store 4gb data in a XML-File. Do you think about a Database? Or split the XML-File in many XML-Files? So you would be able to read data in chunks.
I hope this helps you.

I don't use background worker for this. I use normal threads instead. Try this code:
public void ButtonDoWork_Click(eventArgs......) {
DoWorkThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(DoWork)); // Setup thread
DoWorkThread.isBackground = true; // Its background so, we need to set background flag
DoWorkThread.Start(); // Start the thread
}
private Thread DoWorkThread: // our Thread object
private void DoWork() { // This void contains action that will be performed by thread
//TODO: Background processing. To update UI from another thread use Control.Invoke(...)
}
Please note, I don't tested this code - I write it from my memory and it's late so it can not work.
You can also read about Threads at MSDN :)

Deadlock when updating a UI control from a worker thread

To simplify the explanation of the strange behavior I am experiencing, I have this simple class named Log which fires 1 log events every 1000msec.
public static class Log
{
public delegate void LogDel(string msg);
public static event LogDel logEvent;
public static void StartMessageGeneration ()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++)
{
logEvent.Invoke(i.ToString());
Task.Delay(1000);
}
}
}
I have the Form class below which is subscribed to the log events of the Log class so it can handle them and display in a simple text box.
Once a log message arrives, it is added to a list. Every 500msec, a timer object access that list so its content can be displayed in a text box.
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
private SynchronizationContext context;
private System.Threading.Timer guiTimer = null;
private readonly object syncLock = new object();
private List<string> listOfMessages = new List<string>();
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
context = SynchronizationContext.Current;
guiTimer = new System.Threading.Timer(TimerProcessor, this, 0, 500);
Log.logEvent += Log_logEvent;
}
private void Log_logEvent(string msg)
{
lock (syncLock)
listOfMessages.Add(msg);
}
private void TimerProcessor(object obj)
{
Form1 myForm = obj as Form1;
lock (myForm.syncLock)
{
if (myForm.listOfMessages.Count == 0)
return;
myForm.context.Send(new SendOrPostCallback(delegate
{
foreach (string item in myForm.listOfMessages)
myForm.textBox1.AppendText(item + "\n");
}), null);
listOfMessages.Clear();
}
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Log.StartMessageGeneration();
}
}
The problem I see is that sometimes, there is a dead lock (application stuck). Seems that the 2 locks (1st one for adding to the list and the 2nd one for "retrieving" from the list) are somehow blocking each others.
Hints:
1) reducing the rate of sending the messages from 1 sec to 200msec seems to help (not sure why)
2) Somehow something happens when returning to the GUI thread (using the synchronization context) and accessing the GUI control. If I don't return to the GUI thread, the 2 locks are working fine together...
Thanks everyone!

There's a few problems with your code, and a few... silly things.
First, your Log.StartMessageGeneration doesn't actually produce a log message every second, because you're not awaiting the task returned by Task.Delay - you're basically just creating a thousand timers very quickly (and pointlessly). The log generation is limited only by the Invoke. Using Thread.Sleep is a blocking alternative to Task.Delay if you don't want to use Tasks, await etc. Of course, therein lies your biggest problem - StartMessageGeneration is not asynchronous with respect to the UI thread!
Second, there's little point in using System.Threading.Timer on your form. Instead, just use the windows forms timer - it's entirely on the UI thread so there's no need for marshalling your code back to the UI thread. Since your TimerProcessor doesn't do any CPU work and it only blocks for a very short time, it's the more straight-forward solution.
If you decide to keep using System.Threading.Timer anyway, there's no point in manually dealing with synchronization contexts - just use BeginInvoke on the form; the same way, there's no point in passing the form as an argument to the method, since the method isn't static. this is your form. You can actually see this is the case since you omitted myForm in listOfMessages.Clear() - the two instances are the same, myForm is superfluous.
A simple pause in the debugger will easily tell you where the program is hung - learn to use the debugger well, and it will save you a lot of time. But let's just look at this logically. StartMessageGeneration runs on the UI thread, while System.Threading.Timer uses a thread-pool thread. When the timer locks syncLock, StartMessageGeneration can't enter the same lock, of course - that's fine. But then you Send to the UI thread, and... the UI thread can't do anything, since it's blocked by StartMessageGeneration, which never gives the UI an opportunity to do anything. And StartMessageGeneration can't proceed, because it's waiting on the lock. The only case where this "works" is when StartMessageGeneration runs fast enough to complete before your timer fires (thus freeing the UI thread to do its work) - which is very much possible due to your incorrect use of Task.Delay.
Now let's look on your "hints" with all we know. 1) is simply your bias in measurements. Since you never wait on the Task.Delay in any way, changing the interval does absolutely nothing (with a tiny change in case the delay is zero). 2) of course - that's where your deadlock is. Two pieces of code that depend on a shared resource, while they both require to take posession of another resource. It's a very typical case of a deadlock. Thread 1 is waiting for A to release B, and thread 2 is waiting for B to release A (in this case, A being syncLock and B being the UI thread). When you remove the Send (or replace it with Post), thread 1 no longer has to wait on B, and the deadlock disappears.
There's other things that make writing code like this simpler. There's little point in declaring your own delegate when you can just use Action<string>, for example; using await helps quite a bit when dealing with mixed UI/non-UI code, as well as managing any kind of asynchronous code. You don't need to use event where a simple function will suffice - you can just pass that delegate to a function that needs it if that makes sense, and it may make perfect sense not to allow multiple event handlers to be called. If you decide to keep with the event, at least make sure it conforms to the EventHandler delegate.
To show how your code can be rewritten to be a bit more up-to-date and actually work:
void Main()
{
Application.Run(new LogForm());
}
public static class Log
{
public static async Task GenerateMessagesAsync(Action<string> logEvent,
CancellationToken cancel)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++)
{
cancel.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
logEvent(i.ToString());
await Task.Delay(1000, cancel);
}
}
}
public partial class LogForm : Form
{
private readonly List<string> messages;
private readonly Button btnStart;
private readonly Button btnStop;
private readonly TextBox tbxLog;
private readonly System.Windows.Forms.Timer timer;
public LogForm()
{
messages = new List<string>();
btnStart = new Button { Text = "Start" };
btnStart.Click += btnStart_Click;
Controls.Add(btnStart);
btnStop =
new Button { Text = "Stop", Location = new Point(80, 0), Enabled = false };
Controls.Add(btnStop);
tbxLog = new TextBox { Height = 200, Multiline = true, Dock = DockStyle.Bottom };
Controls.Add(tbxLog);
timer = new System.Windows.Forms.Timer { Interval = 500 };
timer.Tick += TimerProcessor;
timer.Start();
}
private void TimerProcessor(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
foreach (var message in messages)
{
tbxLog.AppendText(message + Environment.NewLine);
}
messages.Clear();
}
private async void btnStart_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
btnStart.Enabled = false;
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
EventHandler stopAction = (_, __) => cts.Cancel();
btnStop.Click += stopAction;
btnStop.Enabled = true;
try
{
await Log.GenerateMessagesAsync(message => messages.Add(message), cts.Token);
}
catch (TaskCanceledException)
{
messages.Add("Cancelled.");
}
finally
{
btnStart.Enabled = true;
btnStop.Click -= stopAction;
btnStop.Enabled = false;
}
}
protected override void Dispose(bool disposing)
{
if (disposing)
{
timer.Dispose();
btnStart.Dispose();
btnStop.Dispose();
tbxLog.Dispose();
}
base.Dispose(disposing);
}
}

SynchronizationContext.Send is run synchronously. When you call it, you actually block the UI thread until the operation is complete. But if UI thread is already in lock state, then it just make sense that you are in deadlock.
You can use SynchronizationContext.Post to avoid this.
I just answer on your question, but the truth is that your code need a "little" refactoring..

C# Invoke button control on separate thread

I have seen a lot of questions about how to edit controls on c# form from a different thread but none make much sense to me. I understand that you can not change any UI from another thread than it's main. To make this work you have to use invoke and from there safely edit the control?
I have a button that starts writing in a file and the moment you press the button the button itself gets disabled so you can not start multiple threads that do exactly the same. When the writing is done I want the button to be available again but I can not get it working on this other thread.
I have this as the Generate_Click event from the form.
private void Generate_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
Generate.Enabled = false;
int x = 512;
int y = 512;
MBrot mbrot = new MBrot(x, y);
PB_Update lb = new PB_Update(0, y, Generator_PB, Generate, mbrot, this);
lb.Start();
}
And this is in PB_Update.cs the ThreadWork() function, when the while loop is done the writing to the file is done and so is the thread so its ended and given a messagebox with "finished" now as last the button needs to be enabled again.
public void ThreadWork()
{
while (true)
{
if (currValue_ >= maxValue_)
break;
ThreadTick();
}
mb_.StopBrot();
t_.Interrupt();
MessageBox.Show("Finished!");
Generate_.Enabled = true;
}

For WinForms you can execute directly on the thread which the control was created on through the Control.BeginInvoke method, you can use Control.Invoke as well but, Control.BeginInvoke is preferred for UI operations.
public void ThreadWork()
{
while (true)
{
if (currValue_ >= maxValue_)
break;
ThreadTick();
}
mb_.StopBrot();
t_.Interrupt();
MessageBox.Show("Finished!");
Generate_.BeginInvoke((Action)delegate()
{
Generate_.Enabled = true;
});
}

Somehow, get a reference to the form that hosts the generate_ button (let's call it myform). Then, at the bottom of your ThreadWork:
myform.Invoke(new Action(() => {
myform.SetGenerateEnabled();
}));
And then inside your form create that method that enables the button appropriately. (I used a method rather than just updating the button directly so that you don't publicly expose the button.)
This executes the commands inside the { ... } on myform's thread, which is a UI thread, because it is UI. At least, that's what I understand. This is how I do all of my UI updating from other threads.

Here's a simple example of a way to kick off an async task that disables a button for 5 seconds and then enables it again. Meanwhile, the rest of the UI is functional.
Note that this async method exists in the same class as your Generate_Click event, and runs on the UI thread. This means that it can enable and disable the button. But the long running task executes on a separate thread, so it doesn't lock the UI.
Hopefully this sample provides you a base to modify for your own code:
private void Generate_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
DisableButton(sender as Button, 5);
}
private async void DisableButton(Button sender, int secondsToDisable)
{
sender.Enabled = false;
// In your code, you would kick off your long-running process here as a task
await Task.Run(()=>Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(secondsToDisable)));
sender.Enabled = true;
}

How do I run a simple bit of code in a new thread?

I have a bit of code that I need to run in a different thread than the GUI as it currently causes the form to freeze whilst the code runs (10 seconds or so).
Assume I have never created a new thread before; what's a simple/basic example of how to do this in C# and using .NET Framework 2.0 or later?

Good place to start reading is Joe Albahari.
If you want to create your own thread, this is as simple as it gets:
using System.Threading;
new Thread(() =>
{
Thread.CurrentThread.IsBackground = true;
/* run your code here */
Console.WriteLine("Hello, world");
}).Start();

BackgroundWorker seems to be best choice for you.
Here is my minimal example. After you click on the button the background worker will begin working in background thread and also report its progress simultaneously. It will also report after the work completes.
using System.ComponentModel;
...
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker bw = new BackgroundWorker();
// this allows our worker to report progress during work
bw.WorkerReportsProgress = true;
// what to do in the background thread
bw.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(
delegate(object o, DoWorkEventArgs args)
{
BackgroundWorker b = o as BackgroundWorker;
// do some simple processing for 10 seconds
for (int i = 1; i <= 10; i++)
{
// report the progress in percent
b.ReportProgress(i * 10);
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
});
// what to do when progress changed (update the progress bar for example)
bw.ProgressChanged += new ProgressChangedEventHandler(
delegate(object o, ProgressChangedEventArgs args)
{
label1.Text = string.Format("{0}% Completed", args.ProgressPercentage);
});
// what to do when worker completes its task (notify the user)
bw.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(
delegate(object o, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs args)
{
label1.Text = "Finished!";
});
bw.RunWorkerAsync();
}
Note:
I put everything in single method
using C#'s anonymous method for
simplicity but you can always pull
them out to different methods.
It is safe to update GUI within
ProgressChanged or
RunWorkerCompleted handlers.
However, updating GUI from DoWork
will cause
InvalidOperationException.

The ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem is pretty ideal for something simple. The only caveat is accessing a control from the other thread.
System.Threading.ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(delegate {
DoSomethingThatDoesntInvolveAControl();
}, null);

Here is another option:
Task.Run(()=>{
//Here is a new thread
});

Quick and dirty, but it will work:
Using at top:
using System.Threading;
simple code:
static void Main( string[] args )
{
Thread t = new Thread( NewThread );
t.Start();
}
static void NewThread()
{
//code goes here
}
I just threw this into a new console application for an exmaple

Try using the BackgroundWorker class. You give it delegates for what to run, and to be notified when work has finished. There is an example on the MSDN page that I linked to.

If you want to get a value:
var someValue;
Thread thread = new Thread(delegate()
{
//Do somthing and set your value
someValue = "Hello World";
});
thread.Start();
while (thread.IsAlive)
Application.DoEvents();

Put that code in a function (the code that can't be executed on the same thread as the GUI), and to trigger that code's execution put the following.
Thread myThread= new Thread(nameOfFunction);
workerThread.Start();
Calling the start function on the thread object will cause the execution of your function call in a new thread.

Here how can use threads with a progressBar , its just for understing how the threads works, in the form there are three progressBar and 4 button:
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
Thread t, t2, t3;
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
CheckForIllegalCrossThreadCalls = false;
t = new Thread(birinicBar); //evry thread workes with a new progressBar
t2 = new Thread(ikinciBar);
t3 = new Thread(ucuncuBar);
}
public void birinicBar() //to make progressBar work
{
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
progressBar1.Value++;
Thread.Sleep(100); // this progressBar gonna work faster
}
}
public void ikinciBar()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++)
{
progressBar2.Value++;
Thread.Sleep(200);
}
}
public void ucuncuBar()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++)
{
progressBar3.Value++;
Thread.Sleep(300);
}
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) //that button to start the threads
{
t.Start();
t2.Start(); t3.Start();
}
private void button4_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)//that button to stup the threads with the progressBar
{
t.Suspend();
t2.Suspend();
t3.Suspend();
}
private void button2_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)// that is for contuniue after stuping
{
t.Resume();
t2.Resume();
t3.Resume();
}
private void button3_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) // finally with that button you can remove all of the threads
{
t.Abort();
t2.Abort();
t3.Abort();
}
}

If you are going to use the raw Thread object then you need to set IsBackground to true at a minimum and you should also set the Threading Apartment model (probably STA).
public static void DoWork()
{
// do some work
}
public static void StartWorker()
{
Thread worker = new Thread(DoWork);
worker.IsBackground = true;
worker.SetApartmentState(System.Threading.ApartmentState.STA);
worker.Start()
}
I would recommend the BackgroundWorker class if you need UI interaction.

// following declaration of delegate ,,,
public delegate long GetEnergyUsageDelegate(DateTime lastRunTime,
DateTime procDateTime);
// following inside of some client method
GetEnergyUsageDelegate nrgDel = GetEnergyUsage;
IAsyncResult aR = nrgDel.BeginInvoke(lastRunTime, procDT, null, null);
while (!aR.IsCompleted) Thread.Sleep(500);
int usageCnt = nrgDel.EndInvoke(aR);
Charles your code(above) is not correct. You do not need to spin wait for completion. EndInvoke will block until the WaitHandle is signaled.
If you want to block until completion you simply need to
nrgDel.EndInvoke(nrgDel.BeginInvoke(lastRuntime,procDT,null,null));
or alternatively
ar.AsyncWaitHandle.WaitOne();
But what is the point of issuing anyc calls if you block? You might as well just use a synchronous call. A better bet would be to not block and pass in a lambda for cleanup:
nrgDel.BeginInvoke(lastRuntime,procDT,(ar)=> {ar.EndInvoke(ar);},null);
One thing to keep in mind is that you must call EndInvoke. A lot of people forget this and end up leaking the WaitHandle as most async implementations release the waithandle in EndInvoke.

another option, that uses delegates and the Thread Pool...
assuming 'GetEnergyUsage' is a method that takes a DateTime and another DateTime as input arguments, and returns an Int...
// following declaration of delegate ,,,
public delegate long GetEnergyUsageDelegate(DateTime lastRunTime,
DateTime procDateTime);
// following inside of some client method
GetEnergyUsageDelegate nrgDel = GetEnergyUsage;
IAsyncResult aR = nrgDel.BeginInvoke(lastRunTime, procDT, null, null);
while (!aR.IsCompleted) Thread.Sleep(500);
int usageCnt = nrgDel.EndInvoke(aR);

There are many ways of running separate threads in .Net, each has different behaviors. Do you need to continue running the thread after the GUI quits? Do you need to pass information between the thread and GUI? Does the thread need to update the GUI? Should the thread do one task then quit, or should it continue running? The answers to these questions will tell you which method to use.
There is a good async method article at the Code Project web site that describes the various methods and provides sample code.
Note this article was written before the async/await pattern and Task Parallel Library were introduced into .NET.

How to: Use a Background Thread to Search for Files
You have to be very carefull with access from other threads to GUI specific stuff (it is common for many GUI toolkits). If you want to update something in GUI from processing thread check this answer that I think is useful for WinForms. For WPF see this (it shows how to touch component in UpdateProgress() method so it will work from other threads, but actually I don't like it is not doing CheckAccess() before doing BeginInvoke through Dispathcer, see and search for CheckAccess in it)
Was looking .NET specific book on threading and found this one (free downloadable). See http://www.albahari.com/threading/ for more details about it.
I believe you will find what you need to launch execution as new thread in first 20 pages and it has many more (not sure about GUI specific snippets I mean strictly specific to threading). Would be glad to hear what community thinks about this work 'cause I'm reading this one. For now looked pretty neat for me (for showing .NET specific methods and types for threading). Also it covers .NET 2.0 (and not ancient 1.1) what I really appreciate.

I'd recommend looking at Jeff Richter's Power Threading Library and specifically the IAsyncEnumerator. Take a look at the video on Charlie Calvert's blog where Richter goes over it for a good overview.
Don't be put off by the name because it makes asynchronous programming tasks easier to code.