|
Ok. Unfortunately, the thread doesn't enter the lock 2x. 
Life, family, faith: Give me a visit.
From my latest post: "A lot of Christians struggle, perhaps at a subconscious level, about the phrase "God of Israel". After all, Israel's God is the God of Judaism, is He not? And the God of Christianity is not the God of Judaism, right?"
Judah Himango
|
|
|
|
|
OK, so that's not the reason. But isWorking can still be false in OnDoSomethingCompletedAsync:
1. Thread1 calls Foo and returns. Now isWorking=true, and PoolThread1 is processing DoSomething. No lock.
2. Thread2 calls Foo and returns. Still isWorking=true, and PoolThread2 is processing DoSomething. No lock.
3. PoolThread1 finishes, calls OnDoSomethingCompletedAsync and returns. Now isWorking=false. No lock.
4. PoolThread2 finishes, and because Foo has not been called again, it finds isWorking=false in OnDoSomethingCompletedAsync.
I don't know why you want isWorking to be true in OnDoSomethingCompletedAsync. If you really want to enforce it, you could enclose the whole DoSomething code inside a lock(syncObject) block. But that would be the end of parallel procession. So what is all this about? Or was it just an academic question?
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Horn wrote: 1. Thread1 calls Foo and returns. Now isWorking=true, and PoolThread1 is processing DoSomething. No lock.
2. Thread2 calls Foo and returns. Still isWorking=true, and PoolThread2 is processing DoSomething. No lock.
Nope. Thread2 calls Foo and returns, yes, but it does NOT spawn PoolThread2 because it sees isWorking = true.
Frank Horn wrote: I don't know why you want isWorking to be true in OnDoSomethingCompletedAsync
I want only 1 thread executing DoSomething at a time. The Debug assertion is a sanity check.
Life, family, faith: Give me a visit.
From my latest post: "A lot of Christians struggle, perhaps at a subconscious level, about the phrase "God of Israel". After all, Israel's God is the God of Judaism, is He not? And the God of Christianity is not the God of Judaism, right?"
Judah Himango
|
|
|
|
|
I want only 1 thread executing DoSomething at a time. The Debug assertion is a sanity check.
Then you could indeed run DoSomething within a lock(SyncObject) block. All threads wanting to call Foo would have to wait for the current DoSomething instance to finish.
Nope. Thread2 calls Foo and returns, yes, but it does NOT spawn PoolThread2 because it sees isWorking = true.
How does Thread2 see that isWorking = true? Does your class containing Foo a.s.o. have a public property IsWorking{get{lock(SyncObject){return isWorking;}}}, and is every call to xyz.Foo enclosed in an if(!xyz.IsWorking) block? Or in a while(true) block waiting for !xyz.IsWorking?
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Horn wrote: How does Thread2 see that isWorking = true?
Recall the Foo method code:
void Foo()
{
lock (syncObject)
{
if (!isWorking)
{
isWorking = true;
new Action(DoSomething).BeginInvoke(OnDoSomethingCompletedAsync, null);
}
}
}Foo will be called many times during app run, but should only spawn DoSomething if it's not currently working.
Life, family, faith: Give me a visit.
From my latest post: "A lot of Christians struggle, perhaps at a subconscious level, about the phrase "God of Israel". After all, Israel's God is the God of Judaism, is He not? And the God of Christianity is not the God of Judaism, right?"
Judah Himango
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I forgot that. Then indeed it should never happen, which only leaves Joe Woodbury's explanation of isWorking being read from cache when Foo is entered the second time.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
How do I access an element of a struct at runtime if I don't know what element I need to access at design time?
I get passed some data in basiclly key=value pairs. If I can access the element in a struct using the key I could update it with the value.
Thanks.
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like Reflection is what you need. But to say for sure, you'd have to give us more info.
Life, family, faith: Give me a visit.
From my latest post: "A lot of Christians struggle, perhaps at a subconscious level, about the phrase "God of Israel". After all, Israel's God is the God of Judaism, is He not? And the God of Christianity is not the God of Judaism, right?"
Judah Himango
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your time. I looked at the reflection information and it looks like that might work. But I think I need a little nudge in the right direction.
Thanks again. Rob
I want to turn something like this...
private List<Instruction> GetInstructions(string sInst)
{
List<Instruction> Instructions = new List<Instruction>();
string[] aInst = sInst.Split(';');
foreach (string i in aInst)
{
string[] u = i.Split('=');
Instruction newInst = new Instruction();
switch (u[0])
{
case "Element1":
newInst.Element1 = u[1];
break;
case "Element2":
newInst.Element2 = u[1];
break;
case "Element3":
newInst.Element3 = u[1];
break;
case "Element4":
newInst.Element4 = u[1];
break;
case "Element5":
newInst.Element5 = u[1];
break;
}
Instructions.Add(newInst);
}
return Instructions;
}
Into something like this...
private List<Instruction> GetInstructions(string sInst)
{
List<Instruction> Instructions = new List<Instruction>();
string[] aInst = sInst.Split(';');
foreach (string i in aInst)
{
string[] u = i.Split('=');
Instruction newInst = new Instruction();
ptrToElement = GetPointerToElement(newInst, u[1]);
ptrToElement = u[0];
Instructions.Add(newInst);
}
return Instructions;
}
|
|
|
|
|
That should have been more like this.
Thanks.
Rob
private List<Instruction> GetInstructions(string sInst)
{
List<Instruction> Instructions = new List<Instruction>();
string[] aInst = sInst.Split(';');
foreach (string i in aInst)
{
string[] u = i.Split('=');
Instruction newInst = new Instruction();
ptrToElement = GetPointerToElement(newInst, u[0]);
ptrToElement = u[1];
Instructions.Add(newInst);
}
return Instructions;
}
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, we can make this work. Here's what it would look like:
private List<Instruction> GetInstructions(string sInst)
{
List<Instruction> instructions = new List<Instruction>();
string[] aInst = sInst.Split(';');
foreach (string i in aInst)
{
string[] u = i.Split('=');
Instruction newInst = new Instruction();
string elementName = u[0];
string elementValue = u[1];
SetElementValue(newInst, elementName, elementValue);
instructions.Add(newInst);
}
return instructions;
}
void SetElementValue(Instruction input, string elementName, string elementValue)
{
PropertyInfo property = typeof(Instruction).GetProperty(elementName, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance);
if(property != null)
{
property.SetValue(input, elementValue, null);
}
}
Life, family, faith: Give me a visit.
From my latest post: "A lot of Christians struggle, perhaps at a subconscious level, about the phrase "God of Israel". After all, Israel's God is the God of Judaism, is He not? And the God of Christianity is not the God of Judaism, right?"
Judah Himango
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks. That is exactly what I needed.
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I am trying to save chinese into sql 2005 database from asp.net,c# website.After executing the store procedure i see ??? in the database.
Can anyone help me?
Thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
|
Can you retrieve the saved Chinese data from the database in the web app?
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
The query analyzer likely cannot display the characters. Check the actual bytes. (And make sure your field is using the correct type)
Need a C# Consultant? I'm available.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest Hemingway
|
|
|
|
|
Use Nvarchar. It stores unicode characters.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for all of your reply.
I am using nvarchar for data type.
I have resource file where I have saved chinese character and I can show chinese character for label but when user enter text in texbox and I save it to database I am seeing ???.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for all your help.
Found the problem.The problem was when I added my storeprocuded didn't have nvarchar. it was varchar.
Once again thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I'm writing an application that uses an System.Speech.Synthesis.SpeechSynthesizer to generate some speech.
The class has a method to set the output to the default audio device or to another audiostream (System.IO.Stream).
But how can I tell it to use just another audio device? I think I might have to get a Stream object of that other device to pass it to the SetOutputToAudioStream() method of the synthesizer, but I have no clue how to do so.
Any help would be appreciated.
Michael.
|
|
|
|
|
This MSDN[^] page might help?
Edit: Sorry just realised this if for mobile devices!
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
This[^] may be more help!
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks a lot, that should do it. I'll try it later.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, here's a new problem: Filler()(from the link above) is called, while the synthesizer is still filling the stream with data. As you can imagine, this results in a disaster. So I cannot make the stream thread-safe (because can't control the filling end) and even if i could, I would have gasps in my output because the buffer would be filled like this:
(1 =data in cycle 1
2=data in cycle 2
0= no data)
11111111111111111100000000000000000
|stream is filled until here
22222222222222222220000000000000000
while it should look like this:
1111111111111111112222222222222222222
Any ideas?
Edit:
Ok, finally got it - i had to wrap the whole synthesizer-class to make the stream thread-safe, but finally, it works. Thanks @ all.
modified on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, has anybody written or come across a thread-safe generic dictionary collection? I need it for a project of mine, I want a fully thread-safe dictionary (ie. with no lock wrapping add and remove only) but with high performance as it will be used in a web application.
Thanks for any help.
|
|
|
|
|
Why not just override where you need to?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
