Develop Reference

Is there a way to not have a WPF MainWindow method terminating to avoid threading?

I'm currently working on a WPF project that is trying to continuously update a listbox based on a network streamed source.
It is my understanding that a initializeComponent() method will only actually display the WPF window once the MainWindow() method has terminated. However I am trying to have a while(true) loop inside it in order to continuously listen for update signals from a server and update the listbox with appropriate values.
Each individual method is working fine, it's just that it doesn't open the WPF window in its current form due to the while loop. I am trying to avoid using a background update thread in order to update the list box because I am aware that I would have to implement functionality in order to pass the thread "ownership" of the listbox to the thread and I'm not 100% sure of how to do this.
Is there a workaround, or better yet, is there something obvious that I'm missing to achieve my required functionality?
The code is as follows:
public MainWindow()
{
TcpClient client = new TcpClient();
client.Connect(serverAddress, port);
NetworkStream stream = client.GetStream();
numberOfPumps = 0; //initialize as 0 on startup.
handshake(stream);
InitializeComponent();
updatePumpList(stream);
updateListBox();
while(true)
{
updatePumpList(stream);
updateListBox();
}
}
The updateListBox() method is simply adding items to the listbox from a dictionary.
private void updateListBox()
{
foreach(KeyValuePair<string, PumpItem> kvp in pumpDict)
{
pumpListBox.Items.Add(kvp.Key + ": " + kvp.Value.state);
}
}

Unfortunately, you just can't do it the way you want to. In a Windows application, you must let the main (UI) thread run. Any looping you do on that thread will hang the whole application until it's done. If the window's up, that looks like the window is frozen (because it is). If it's not up yet, it looks like a wait cursor, forever. No way around that. The thread has to be left alone to process input, update the window, etc. Even manually pumping the message loop (anybody remember MFC?) is a poor expedient. Windows applications work best if you leave the main thread to do its thing as the designers intended.
We do a lot of stuff on the main thread of course, but it's quick stuff that hands control back before the user notices any latency. Synchronous Internet access is never quick enough, and a polling loop that lasts for the lifetime of your process is out of the question.
You've got two options here, both of them pretty anodyne in practice.
You could use a DispatchTimer, with asynchronous internet access.
The other is the worker thread you're trying to avoid. They're not that bad. Just keep a reference to the Thread object around to abort on program shutdown, and the thread has to "invoke into" the UI thread when it does anything that'll touch any UI (including setting any property that will raise a PropertyChanged event).
It's not a big deal at all:
Action act = () => Status = newStatus;
App.Current.Dispatcher.Invoke(act);

Have you considered setting up an onLoad event handler for your WPF window which will trigger once the WPF window is displayed? The event handler could then run your while loop accordingly.
Alternatively, you could have a timer primed to fire an event a few moments after the end of the constructor, allowing the window to display and then the while loop to begin.

MessageBox modal to a single form

I want to display a MessageBox that is modal to just a single form, and allows other top level windows on the thread to remain active. WinForms disables all windows on the current thread, whether displaying a custom modal form or using the MessageBox class.
I've tried a number of different approaches to solving the problem, including re-enabling any other top level windows (using the Win32 EnableWindow function) and p/invoking the native MessageBox function. Both of these approaches work, but leave keyboard shortcuts inoperable, including tab to move between controls, escape to cancel an open menu and most importantly menu shortcut keys.
I can make menu shortcut keys work by installing a keyboard hook when I display the MessageBox and then directly calling ProcessCmdKey on the active form, but other keyboard shortcuts still don't work. I guess I could press on and add more hacks to make these other cases work, but I was wondering if there was a better way.
Note, this is not about being non-blocking, but about not disabling all windows on the current thread. It happens that the solution may be similar, however.

The basic problem you are battling here is that MessageBox.Show() pumps its own message loop to make itself modal. This message loop is built into Windows and is thoroughly unaware of what the Winforms message loop looks like. So anything special that Winforms does in its message loop just won't happen when you use MessageBox. Which is keyboard handling: detecting mnemonics, implementing navigation and calling methods like ProcessCmdKey() so that a form can implement its own shortcut keystrokes. Not normally a problem since it is supposed to be modal and ignore user input.
The only practical way to revive this is to display the message box on its own thread. This is formally allowed in the winapi, the owner of a window can be a window owned by another thread. But that's a rule that Microsoft did not implement when they added the code to .NET 2.0 that detects threading mistakes. Working around that code requires an IWin32Window as the message box owner that is not also a Control.
Add a new class to your project and paste this code:
using System;
using System.Threading;
using System.Windows.Forms;
public class NonModalMessageBox : IWin32Window {
public NonModalMessageBox(Form owner, Action<IWin32Window> display) {
this.handle = owner.Handle;
var t = new Thread(new ThreadStart(() => display(this)));
t.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.STA);
t.Start();
}
public IntPtr Handle {
get { return handle; }
}
private IntPtr handle;
}
And use it like this:
new NonModalMessageBox(this, (owner) => {
MessageBox.Show(owner, "Testing", "Non-modal");
});
Where this the Form object that should be disabled while the message box is displayed. There's little I can do to make you feel better about this hack, if the FUD is too overpowering then you really do need to re-implement MessageBox with your own Form class so you can use Show() instead of ShowDialog(). It has been done.

You could pass a reference to the Form, set Enabled property to false when you open the dialog, and set it back to true when the dialog closes.

Creating A MessageBox That Doesn't Stop Code?

Ok, I'm looking for something pretty simple: creating a MessageBox that doesn't stop my code.
I'm guessing I'll have to create a different thread or something? Please advise on the best way to accomplish this.
Thanks!

You could spin up another message pump by calling it on separate thread. MessageBox.Show pumps message so it is safe to do without a call to Application.Run.
public void ShowMessageBox()
{
var thread = new Thread(
() =>
{
MessageBox.Show(...);
});
thread.Start();
}
Edit:
I probably should mention that I do not recommend doing this. It can cause other problems. For example, if you have two threads pumping messages then it is possible for the message box to get stuck behind another form with no way to make it go away if the form is waiting for someone to close the message box. You really should try to figure out another way around the problem.

No, You're going to have to make your own message box form. the MessageBox class only supports behavior similar to .ShowDialog() which is a modal operation.
Just create a new form that takes parameters and use those to build up a styled message box to your liking.
Update 2014-07-31
In the spirit of maintaining clarity for anyone else who finds this through google I'd like to take a second to explain this a bit more:
Under the hood MessageBox is a fancy C# Wrapper around the Windows SDK user32.dll MessageBox Function and thus behaves exactly the same way (after converting .NET Enums into the integers that represent the same thing in the system call.
What this means is that when you call MessageBox.Show() the call is marshaled out to the OS and will block the current thread until an option is selected or the window is killed. To prevent your code from being halted you need to launch the message box on a seperate thread, but this will mean that any result that comes back from the message box (Yes / No / Ok / Cancel / Etc...) will be returned to the separate thread that was tasked to call the message box.
If you act on the result of this message box launched this way you'll have to Dispatch the result back to the UI Thread for Thread Saftey.
Alternatively you can create your own message box form in WinForms / WPF and call it with the .Show() method. Any click events on the buttons will execute on the UI Thread and you will not have to dispatch the calls back to the UI Thread to manipulate things in the UI.

Run a modal dialog on a non-UI thread

I'm writing a simple data UI using standard .Net databinding to a typed DataSet from SQL Server.
I have a reload button which calls Fill on all of the DataAdapters to get new data from the database (in case another user changed the data).
This takes some time, during which the UI is frozen. It must be run on the UI thread or the databinding event handlers throw cross-thread exceptions.
I'd like to show a modal "Please Wait" dialog on a background thread (so that it can be animated) while the UI thread connects to the database.
How can I show a modal dialog box on the non-UI thread?
EDIT: I'm aware that best practice is to run the operation in the background, but I can't do that because of the databinding events.

You should do the opposite. Run your long-running process on a background thread and leave the UI thread free to respond to the user actions.
If you want to block any user actions while it is processing you have a number of options, including modal dialogs. Once the background thread completes processing you can inform the main thread about the outcome

The code running in the databinding events need to be decoupled from the UI, probably using some kind of data transfer object.
Then you can run the query operation in a separate thread or a BackgroundWorker, and leave the UI thread as it was.
Edit: The really quick way to fix this is to get the events to run in their own delegate using InvokeRequired and .Invoke. That will give the methods UI context. My co-worker does this like it's going out of style and it annoys me to no end because it's rarely a good idea to do it this way... but if you want a fast solution this will work. (I'm not at work so I don't have a sample with me; I'll try to come up with something.)
Edit 2: I'm not sure what you're asking for is possible. I made a sample app that created a modal dialog in another thread, and it ends up being modeless. Instead of using a modal dialog, could you use some other control or set of controls to indicate progress change, most likely directly on the same form?

using( var frmDialog = new MyPleasWaitDialog() ) {
// data loading is started after the form is shown
frmDialog.Load += (_sender, _e) {
// load data in separate thread
ThreadPool.QueueWorkItem( (_state)=> {
myAdapter.Fill( myDataSet );
// refresh UI components in correct (UI) thread
frmDialog.Invoke( (Action)myDataControl.Refresh );
// close dialog
frmDialog.Invoke( (Action)frmDialog.Close() );
}
}
// shows dialog
frmDialog.ShowDialog( this );
}

Here is an example of using BackgroundWorker to do the loading of data and running a user friendly form to show 'Loading records' or similar...
public void Run()
{
bgWorkrFillDS = new BackgroundWorker();
bgWorkrFillDS.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(bgWorkrFillDS_RunWorkerCompleted);
bgWorkrFillDS.DoWork += new DoWorkEventHandler(bgWorkrFillDS_DoWork);
bgWorkrFillDS.RunWorkerAsync();
}
void bgWorkrFillDS_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
BackgroundWorker bgWrkrFillDS = (BackgroundWorker)sender as BackgroundWorker;
if (bgWrkrFillDS != null)
{
// Load up the form that shows a 'Loading....'
// Here we fill in the DS
// someDataSetAdapter.Fill(myDataSet);
}
}
void bgWorkrFillDS_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
// Hide or unload the form when the work is done
}
Hope this helps...
Take care,
Tom.

I solved this problem by creating a new DataSet, loading in in the background, then calling DataSet.Merge on the UI thread. Thanks everyone for your advice, which led to this solution.
As an added bonus, this runs much faster than it used to (calling Fill in the background, which only worked with no grids open). Does anyone know why?

Delay loading of combobox when form loads

I've got a Windows Forms (C#) project with multiple comboboxes/listboxes etc that are populated when the form loads.
The problem is that the loading of the comboboxes/listboxes is slow, and since the loading is done when the form is trying to display the entire form isn't shown until all the controls have been populated. This can in some circumstances be 20+ seconds.
Had there been a Form_finished_loaded type of event I could have put my code in there, but I can't find an event that is fired after the form is done drawing the basic controls.
I have one requirement though - the loading has to be done in the main thread (since I get the items from a non-threading friendly COM-application).
I have found one potential solution, but perhaps there is a better way?
I can create a System.Timer.Timer when creating the form, and have the first Tick be called about 1 second later, and then populate the lists from that tick. That gives the form enough time to be displayed before it starts filling the lists.
Does anyone have any other tips on how to delay the loading of the controls?

There is the Shown event that "occurs whenever the form is first displayed.". Also you may want to use the BeginUpdate and EndUpdate functions to make the populating of your combobox faster.

It has that certain smell of workaround, but this approach should fulfil your needs:
private bool _hasInitialized = false;
private void Form1_Shown(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (!_hasInitialized)
{
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(state =>
{
Thread.Sleep(200); // brief sleep to allow the main thread
// to paint the form nicely
this.Invoke((Action)delegate { LoadData(); });
});
}
}
private void LoadData()
{
// do the data loading
_hasInitialized = true;
}
What it does is that it reacts when the form is shown, checks if it has already been initialized before, and if not it spawns a thread that will wait for a brief moment before calling the LoadData method on the main thread. This will allow for the form to get painted properly. The samething could perhaps be achieve by simply calling this.Refresh() but I like the idea of letting the system decide how to do the work.
I would still try to push the data loading onto a worker thread, invoking back on the main thread for populating the UI (if it is at all possible with the COM component).

Can you get your data from a web service that calls the COM component?
That way, you can display empty controls on a Locked form at the start, make Asynchronous calls to get the data, and on return populate the respective combos, and once all of them are loaded, you can unlock the form for the user to use.

You could listen for the VisibleChanged event and the first time it's value is true you put your initialization code.

Isn't FormShown the event you're looking for?

When you say that you cannot use a background thread because of COM what do you mean? I am using many COM components within my apps and running them on background threads.
If you create a new thread as an STAThread you can probably load the ComboBox/ListBox on a Non-UI thread. IIRC the ThreadPool allocates worker threads as MTAThread so you'll need to actually create a thread manually instead of using ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem.