I need to "send" a piece of code from another thread (Excel Interop) to the UI thread to execute. Normally you'd use Invoke on the Form, which implements the ISynchronizeInvoke interface:
public class MyForm : Form
{
...
private void Button_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
SomeExcelWorkbook.OnBeforeClose += delegate(ref bool Cancel)
{
this.Invoke(someCode);
};
}
}
Unfortunately there is a layer of abstraction between the form code and the code that defines the event handler, and I don't have a reference to the form at that point:
public void CodeExecutedByUIThread()
{
ISynchronizeInvoke sync;
SomeExcelWorkbook.OnBeforeClose += delegate(ref bool Cancel)
{
sync.Invoke(someCode);
};
}
When entering CodeExecutedByUIThread, we are still in the UI thread, so in theory everything needed should be there. Unfortunately the Form is the only class implementing that interface, is it?
How can I get an ISynchronizeInvoke from within the UI thread? Apparently Thread.CurrentThread doesn't provide it...
Or is there a way to get a SynchronizationContext? How would I retrieve and use that?
Update: Oh, I see, getting the SynchronizationContext object looks as simple as SynchronizationContext.Current, which doesn't need any reference to a form. So I'll google little bit more about how to use that.
In general, I think that neither is possible.
This might seem like an obvious answer, but what we used in this case was to store both the SynchronizationContext and the reference to the Form (as an ISynchronizeInvoke) in a static class at application startup.
MainForm main = new MainForm();
EnvironmentService.UI = main;
EnvironmentService.UIContext = SynchronizationContext.Current;
Application.Run(main);
Related
Relatively new to C# and coding in general (first post here). I have a WinForms local application where some information is displayed to the user in a ReadOnly(true) RichTextBox. Almost all my classes need to send information to that RichTextBox. To simplify this process, I created a method inside a static class that uses a locked delegate to send the information to that RichTextBox. Here is a sample:
static class MyClass
{
public delegate void MessageReceivedEventHandler(string message);
public static event MessageReceivedEventHandler messageReceivedEventHandler;
public static void MessageBox(string message)
{
lock (messageReceivedEventHandler)
{
//Thread.Sleep(20);
messageReceivedEventHandler?.Invoke(message);
}
}
}
partial class MyForm : Form
{
public MyForm()
{
MyClass.messageReceivedEventHandler += OnMessageReceived;
}
private void OnMessageReceived(string message)
{
richTextBox1.Text = richTextBox1.Text.Insert(0, $" {message}\n");
}
private void Button1_click()
{
MyClass.MessageBox("This should be working!");
//Add more work here...
}
}
The code above would simply print "This should be working!" inside the RichtTextbox.
The problem is the text from richTextBox1 sometimes becoming empty. This issue seems to appear when the MessageBox method is being called in rapid succession. My assumption was that since I have diffent Tasks running at the same time (in other parts of my code), it probably is two Tasks attempting to use the same static ressource, hence the use of Lock. But I still have the issue.
Adding the Thread.Sleep(20) seems to fix the problem, but that is far from elegant/robust. It starts breaking up again when the time inside Sleep is <10ms.
Edit 1:
To clarify what I mean by "string becoming empty", it means the text from richTextBox1 is == "" at some points, which should not happen since the code is always inserting the text, not replacing it. The OnMessageReceived method is the only place where action is taken on the RichTextBox text.
Edit 2:
I saw many questions related to the other tasks running. First, yes it is a multi-threaded application. The only relation between those tasks and my main form is the "print" function I wrote above. To give more context, this application is used to control the position of stepper motors relative to an electrical signal. When doing so, I need to print important information in my main form. This is why losing the information in my RichTextBox (where I print the information) is an issue. The possible reason of why I am losing the text inside that RichTextBox should be the focus of this thread.
Keep in mind that this is a personnal side project, and not a large scale application.
Thanks,
Laurent
There are multiple problems in your code.
First, you should not lock on a public object, since that allows other threads to lock on the same object, risking interlocking your threads. Second, your symptoms suggest multiple threads are trying to access the ressources. Rather than depending on complex thread locking code, you'd rather schedule UI operations on the UI context, which will allow calling adding message from background tasks.
The best way to do that is to that is by using Control.BeginInvoke()
You can't copy your form instance everywhere, so we'll expose a static method. You could make the class a singleton, but if you need multiple instances that won't work. I'll give a more versatile example. When the static method is called, you don't have access to the form instance anymore, so we'll use IOC pattern with an event and delegate.
Let's make a private static event that all instances will register a callback to in the constructor. When the static method raises the static event, all instances callback will be called. The callback will schedule a modification of its text box.
partial class MyForm : Form
{
private class MessageWriteRequestedEventArgs : EventArgs
{
public string Message { get; }
public MessageWriteRequestedEventArgs(string message)
{
Message = message;
}
}
private static event EventHandler<MessageWriteRequestedEventArgs> MessageWriteRequested;
public MyForm()
{
MessageWriteRequested += OnMessageWriteRequested;
}
public static void WriteMessage(string message)
{
MessageWriteRequested?.Invoke(this, new MessageWriteRequestedEventArgs(message));
}
private void OnMessageWriteRequested(object sender, MessageWriteRequestedEventArgs e)
{
richTextBox1.BeginInvoke(() => WriteMessageSafe(e.message));
}
private void WriteMessageSafe(string message)
{
richTextBox1.Text = richTextBox1.Text.Insert(0, $" {message}\n");
}
private void Button1_click()
{
// you're on ui context, you're safe to access local ui resources
WriteMessageSafe("This should be working!");
// if you have multiple MyForm instances, you need to use the event
WriteMessage("Broadcasting my tralala");
}
}
If you need to write to the textbox from anywhere else :
// do stuff
MyForm.WriteMessage("Ho Ho Ho !");
.NET already includes a class for reporting progress (or any other information) from an asynchronous operation in a thread-safe manner, Progress< T>. It doesn't need locking and even better, it decouples the sender and receiver. Many long-running BCL operations accept an IProgress<T> parameter to report progress.
You haven't explained what's going on in the form, or what task is reporting the data. Assuming the producer is another method in the same form, you could create a Progress<T> instance in the same method that starts the async operation, eg :
async void Button1_Click()
{
var progress=new Progress<string>(ReportMessage);
ReportMessage("Starting");
await Task.Run(()=>SomeLongOp(progress));
ReportMessage("Finished");
}
void SomeLongOp(IProgress<string> progress)
{
for(int i=0;i<1000000;i++)
{
...
progress.Report($"Message {i}");
...
}
}
void ReportMessage(string message)
{
richTextBox1.Text = richTextBox1.Text.Insert(0, $" {message}\n");
}
By using IProgress< T>, the SomeLongOp method isn't tied to a specific form or global instance. It could easily be a method on another class
Publishing lots of messages
Let's say you have a lot of workers, doing a lot of things, eg monitoring a lot of devices, and want all of them to publish messages to the same Log textbox or RTF box. Progress< T> "simply" executes the reporting delegate or event handler on its original sync context. It doesn't have an asynchronous Report method, nor can it queue messages. In a really high-traffic environment, the synchronization switch can delay all workers.
The built-in answer to this is to use one of the pub/sub classes like ActionBlock< T> or a Channel.
An ActionBlock< T> processes the messages in its input queue in order, using a worker task that runs on the ThreadPool by default. This can be changed by specifying a different TaskScheduler in its execution options. By default, its input queue is unbounded.
One could use an ActionBlock to receive messages from multiple workers and display them on a textbox. The block can be created in the constructor, and passed to all workers as an ITargetBlock<T> interface :
ActionBlock<string> _logBlock;
public MyForm()
{
var options=new ExecutionDataFlowBlockOptions {
TaskScheduler=TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext();
};
_block=new ActionBlock<string>(ReportMessage,options);
}
Now the fun begins. If the workers are created by the form itself, the workers can publish to the block directly :
public async void Start100Workers_Click(...)
{
var workers=Enumerable.Range(0,100)
.Select(id=>DoWork(id,_block));
await Task.WhenAll(workers);
}
async Task DoWork(int id,ITargetBlock<string> logBlock)
{
.....
await logBlock.SendAsync(message);
...
}
Or the block could be exposed through a public property, so other classes/forms in the application can post to it.
public ITargetBlock<string> LogBlock=>_block;
I'm going to show a simple way to do what I think you're after.
I started with a .NET Core 3.1 Win forms application. I added a rich text control to the form. I added a button to the form.
I added a TaskCompletionSource as a instance property - this will be used to control the tasks acting as workers which you described.
CancellationTokenSource sharedCancel = new CancellationTokenSource();
I created an interface to represent something that accepts messages as you described:
public interface IMyMessageSink
{
Task ReceiveMessage(string message);
}
I made my form support this interface.
public partial class Form1 : Form, IMyMessageSink
The ReceiveMessage method looks like this:
public Task ReceiveMessage(string message)
{
if(this.sharedCancel == null || this.sharedCancel.IsCancellationRequested)
return Task.FromResult(0);
this.Invoke(new Action<Form1>((s) => this.richTextBox1.Text = this.richTextBox1.Text.Insert(0, $"{message}\n")), this);
return Task.FromResult(0);
}
You'll see the Invoke handles the synchronization back to the UI thread.
This should probably use BeginInvoke and then convert the APM to async tasks which you can read about here. But for an SO answer the above simple code will suffice.
Also note there's no error handling. You'll want to add that to your generator and to the button handler.
Next I created a class to represent something that creates messages. This class takes the interface created and the cancellation token. It looks like this:
public class MyMessageGenerator
{
CancellationToken cancel;
IMyMessageSink sink;
public MyMessageGenerator(CancellationToken cancel, IMyMessageSink sink)
{
this.cancel = cancel;
this.sink = sink;
}
public async Task GenerateUntilCanceled()
{
try
{
while (!this.cancel.IsCancellationRequested)
{
await sink.ReceiveMessage(this.GetHashCode().ToString());
await Task.Delay(5000, this.cancel);
}
}
catch (OperationCanceledException)
{ }
}
}
In the button handler we create the message generators.
async void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (null == this.sharedCancel)
return;
await Task.Run(() => new MyMessageGenerator(this.sharedCancel.Token, this).GenerateUntilCanceled());
}
Finally I added an override for the form closing event:
protected override void OnClosing(CancelEventArgs e)
{
if (null != this.sharedCancel)
{
this.sharedCancel.Cancel();
this.sharedCancel.Dispose();
this.sharedCancel = null;
}
base.OnClosing(e);
}
If the application becomes larger and more complex you would likely benefit by adding services exposed using a DI container. You can read about adding DI to a winforms app here.
As you can see, I have two classes. RfidReaderHardware generates event in thread "th", but Form running at another thread. As you can see, in form if use Invoke method of ListViewControl. So, question is how to change RfidReaderHardware to resolve encapsulation problem.
public class RfidReaderHardware : IDisposable
{
public event EventHandler<RfidReaderEventArgs> OnNewPackage;
Thread th;
//This method will be called from thread "th"
private void FireNewPackageEvent(UHFPackage package)
{
... code ...
}
... some code ...
}
and we have example code, where this event is using
public partial class PassageForm : Form
{
RfidReaderHardware RfidReader = new RfidReaderHardware(...);
private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
RfidReader.OnNewPackage += NewRfidPackage;
}
//not sure, but i think it's running in thread "th"
private void NewRfidPackage(Object o, RfidReaderEventArgs e)
{
ListViewItem item = new ListViewItem();
//from point of encapsulation view it's wrong as you know
CPackageList.Invoke(new Action(() => {CPackageList.Items.Add(item); }));
}
}
question is how to change RfidReaderHardware to resolve encapsulation problem
In fact there is no encapsulation problem. By definition, the relation between event source and subscriber is one to many, hence the source cannot "encapsulate" a logic for a specific subscriber. It's the subscriber choice how to handle the notification. One can ignore it, or handle it immediately, or like in your case handle it on the UI thread either synchronously (using Control.Invoke) or asynchronously (using Control.BeginInvoke).
Not so sure there's any real need to fix this, having the UI object itself deal with the fact that event is fired on the "wrong" thread is not a flaw. As long as you know it is in fact fired on the wrong thread, a documentation requirement.
.NET however has a general mechanism to solve this, it is used in several places inside the .NET Framework code. Your RfidReaderHardware class constructor can copy the value of SynchronizationContext.Current and store it in a field. With the implicit assumption that the object is created by code that runs on the UI thread. When you are ready to fire the event, and the copied object isn't null, you can then use its Post() or Send() method. Which automagically makes the code resume on the UI thread. Regardless of the specific UI class library that was used, works just as well in a WPF or Universal app for example.
Some sample code, it doesn't take much:
public class RfidReaderHardware {
public event EventHandler Received;
public RfidReaderHardware() {
syncContext = System.Threading.SynchronizationContext.Current;
}
protected void OnReceived(EventArgs e) {
if (syncContext == null) FireReceived(e);
else syncContext.Send((_) => FireReceived(e), null);
}
protected void FireReceived(EventArgs e) {
var handler = Received;
if (handler != null) Received(this, e);
}
private System.Threading.SynchronizationContext syncContext;
}
I’m using a separate class that instantiates different barcode objects depending on the type of machine, which raise events once a barcode is read.
So to transmit it to the form, I also raise an UNIQUE event ‘myEvent’ that all my forms listens, but inside the form I have to use this.Invoke((Action) mymethod(argument)); to be able to update the components at the user interface, as long as the handler to myEvent is executed on another thread different from that of the form.
So I have this:
My class -> barcode.readed(..) is triggered, then from its handler, I Raise myEvent, that is captured on my Form, and from the handler for myEvent on my form, I execute the this.Invoke…
I know this is a somewhat standard procedure, but I’d like to get rid of that Invoke, and instead, calling directly to the myMethod(argument); function.
I think that this is related to make my class thread safe, but I don’t know how to implement that in my case.
In fact, if I use the original manufacturer barcode.readed() event from inside the form it does not need to call the invoke, as long as this is thread safe, but I don’t know how to mimic that, and I really need to wrap all the different barcode handlers inside a different project, for my forms to use only one ‘myEvent’ that returns the desired barcode, and thus, not repeating code.
Thanks in advance,
Roger Tranchez
If you inherit your class from control (basically create a new custom control), you can handle events on the UI thread without using Invokes as the control (your barcode reader class) is part of the UI thread.
Sounds like you are using a worker thread for reading barcodes, to keep the UI responsive. And the barcode object just runs on whichever thread created it.
You can centralise event handling (to avoid repeating code) and read barcodes on a worker thread as follows:
Wrap the barcode object inside a custom object/library MyBarcodeReader that exposes MyEvent.
In the constructor for MyBarcodeReader, capture the current SynchronizationContext to a class field syncContext. This will be your UI's SynchronizationContext if your form constructs MyBarcodeReader.
When you activate MyBarcodeReader (e.g. MyBarcodeReader.Execute), create the barcode object on a worker thread.
When you need to raise MyEvent, call syncContext.Send (this will be on the worker thread), passing a delegate whose purpose is to raise MyEvent. syncContext.Send will synchronise to the UI thread (like Control.Invoke). The code below illustrates this.
public class MyBarcodeReader
{
private readonly SynchronizationContext syncContext;
// Handler for barcode object's Readed event.
private void Barcode.Readed(Object sender, Event e)
{
// Block the worker thread to synchronize with the thread associated
// with SynchronizationContext.
syncContext.Send(SyncMyEvent, (Object)e);
}
// Raises MyEvent on the thread associated with SynchronizationContext,
// usually a UI thread.
private void SyncMyEvent(Object o)
{
if (MyEvent != null)
{
MyEvent((Event)o);
}
}
// Constructor.
public MyBarcodeReader()
{
syncContext = SynchronizationContext.Current;
}
}
The approach here will block the worker thread (same as Control.Invoke) but not block the UI thread. If you have one or more forms that subscribe to MyEvent, they don't need to use Control.Invoke; they don't even need to know about the worker thread.
There are some excellent online references on SynchronizationContext, see CodeProject and MSDN magazine.
I've found a solution here: Basically it passes over the form control to the class constructor, and then, inside that class it uses the form.Invoke to fire the event from the form ui thread.
CLASS:
using System;
using System.Windows.Forms;
using System.Threading;
namespace ThreadTest
{
public class WorkerClass
{
private Thread thr;
// UI control for update
public Control UIControl { get; set; }
public delegate void StatusUpdate(DateTime dateTime, string message);
public event StatusUpdate OnStatusUpdate;
// Starts thread
public void Start()
{
thr = new Thread(new ThreadStart(MainWorker));
thr.Start();
}
// Main thread worker
public void MainWorker()
{
int i = 0;
while (true)
{
string message = string.Format("Value of i={0}", i++);
FireStatusUpdate(DateTime.Now, message);
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
}
// Fire thread safe event
private void FireStatusUpdate(DateTime dateTime, string message)
{
// UIControl is set and OnStatusUpdate has subscriber
if (UIControl != null && OnStatusUpdate != null)
{
if (UIControl.InvokeRequired)
{
UIControl.Invoke(new StatusUpdate(FireStatusUpdate),
new object[] { dateTime, message });
return;
}
OnStatusUpdate(dateTime, message);
}
}
}
}
FORM:
using System;
using System.Drawing;
using System.Windows.Forms;
namespace ThreadTest
{
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
WorkerClass worker = new WorkerClass();
// add event handler
worker.OnStatusUpdate += new WorkerClass.StatusUpdate(worker_OnStatusUpdate);
// add UI control to invoke
worker.UIControl = this;
worker.Start();
}
void worker_OnStatusUpdate(DateTime dateTime, string message)
{
label1.Text = dateTime.ToLongTimeString();
label1.Text += " " + message;
}
}
In my case, I've changed the type of event, from StatusUpdate to
EventHandler<MyEventArgs>
, being MyEventArgs this class:
public class MyEventArgs : EventArgs
{
public string MyString { get; set; }
}
Thank you !
I came across a situation which puzzled me at work today which I have simplified in the following code. This code builds and throws no exceptions during debug.
Suppose I have a WinForms app. In my main UI thread I spin off another thread which instantiates an object which in turn holds reference to a control (label1 in my example). I then call a method on my object (SetLabelText) which passes it's execution back onto the UI thread if required.
What stumped me was how, when we are back in the UI thread and executing SetLabelText, is .net CLR able to access the labelText variable when we are executing on a thread (ie the UI thread) which did not create the instance of Thing.
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
delegate void DoSomethingDelegate();
public Form1()
{
InitializeComponent();
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var t = new Thread(DoSomethingWithThing);
t.Start();
}
private void DoSomethingWithThing()
{
var thing = new Thing(this.label1);
thing.SetLabelText();
}
}
public class Thing
{
private Label label;
private string labelText = "new value";
delegate void SetLabelTextDelegate();
public Thing(Label label)
{
this.label = label;
}
public void SetLabelText()
{
if (this.label.InvokeRequired)
{
var setLabelDel = new SetLabelTextDelegate(SetLabelText);
this.label.Invoke(setLabelDel);
}
else
{
this.label.Text = this.labelText;
}
}
}
References to objects are available on any thread.
Threads are not sand-boxed from each other. They share resources unless you explicitly create non-shared resources.
Threads are execution contexts. Think of your application as a kitchen and each thread as a chef. They can work at the same time but if two of them try to use the same knife at the same time, things get messy. This is why c# has the lock keyword and other synchronization mechanisms.
WinForms has restrictions on access to controls because of the way WinForms renders.
I have a WPF/C# program with several classes, and the MainWindow.cs class has user controls which I'd like to update with the status of the computation occurring inside other classes. After googling around and borrowing from examples, I figured out how to set up an Event inside the other class, and invoking it when something changed. Then as long as the main class has a handler tied that event, I could appropriately update UI stuff (status bars, etc). Below is a stripped-down version of what I'm doing:
namespace Program
{
public partial class MainWindow : Window
{
public void SetUpHandler()
{
TestA.WorkerProgressThingie += new ProgressChangedEventHandler(TestA_ProgressChanged);
}
void TestA_ProgressChanged(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e)
{
progressBar1.Value = e.ProgressPercentage
}
}
public class TestA
{
public static event ProgressChangedEventHandler WorkerProgressThingie;
public static void SomeFunction()
{
int value = 0;
//...(some boring code that does something here)
ProgressChangedEventArgs e = new ProgressChangedEventArgs(value, null);
if (WorkerProgressThingie != null)
WorkerProgressThingie.Invoke(null, e)
}
}
}
Is there not a way to simply call the progressBar property from the other class? (i.e. MainWindow.progressBar.Value)?
What is the purpose of the "object sender" parameter when I invoke the event, and how is it supposed to be used normally? The examples I see always use 'null'.
Thanks!
1) Yes, you can access any part of any class if it is declared public. In this case, you could declare the progressBar control as public, and anything that has a reference to class MainWindow can fiddle with it. HOWEVER, this would be pretty poor practice. Instead, you could bind to some 'value' which updates in relation to the current progress of the activity and let the MainWindow class worry about how it represents that change (in this case by updating a ProgressBar),
2) object sender in all events is meant to be a reference to the object which raised the event, so the event consumer knows where the event came from. Using null is also poor practice IMO, and in general, an object which raises an event should do so like;
SomeEvent(this, someEventArgs);