Search Results

Search found 1302 results on 53 pages for 'async'.

Page 1/53 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Async CTP (C# 5): How to make WCF work with Async CTP

    - by javarg
    If you have recently downloaded the new Async CTP you will notice that WCF uses Async Pattern and Event based Async Pattern in order to expose asynchronous operations. In order to make your service compatible with the new Async/Await Pattern try using an extension method similar to the following: WCF Async/Await Method public static class ServiceExtensions {     public static Task<DateTime> GetDateTimeTaskAsync(this Service1Client client)     {         return Task.Factory.FromAsync<DateTime>(             client.BeginGetDateTime(null, null),             ar => client.EndGetDateTime(ar));     } } The previous code snippet adds an extension method to the GetDateTime method of the Service1Client WCF proxy. Then used it like this (remember to add the extension method’s namespace into scope in order to use it): Code Snippet var client = new Service1Client(); var dt = await client.GetDateTimeTaskAsync(); Replace the proxy’s type and operation name for the one you want to await.

    Read the article

  • Understanding C# async / await (1) Compilation

    - by Dixin
    Now the async / await keywords are in C#. Just like the async and ! in F#, this new C# feature provides great convenience. There are many nice documents talking about how to use async / await in specific scenarios, like using async methods in ASP.NET 4.5 and in ASP.NET MVC 4, etc. In this article we will look at the real code working behind the syntax sugar. According to MSDN: The async modifier indicates that the method, lambda expression, or anonymous method that it modifies is asynchronous. Since lambda expression / anonymous method will be compiled to normal method, we will focus on normal async method. Preparation First of all, Some helper methods need to make up. internal class HelperMethods { internal static int Method(int arg0, int arg1) { // Do some IO. WebClient client = new WebClient(); Enumerable.Repeat("http://weblogs.asp.net/dixin", 10) .Select(client.DownloadString).ToArray(); int result = arg0 + arg1; return result; } internal static Task<int> MethodTask(int arg0, int arg1) { Task<int> task = new Task<int>(() => Method(arg0, arg1)); task.Start(); // Hot task (started task) should always be returned. return task; } internal static void Before() { } internal static void Continuation1(int arg) { } internal static void Continuation2(int arg) { } } Here Method() is a long running method doing some IO. Then MethodTask() wraps it into a Task and return that Task. Nothing special here. Await something in async method Since MethodTask() returns Task, let’s try to await it: internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> MethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { int result = await HelperMethods.MethodTask(arg0, arg1); return result; } } Because we used await in the method, async must be put on the method. Now we get the first async method. According to the naming convenience, it is called MethodAsync. Of course a async method can be awaited. So we have a CallMethodAsync() to call MethodAsync(): internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> CallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { int result = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); return result; } } After compilation, MethodAsync() and CallMethodAsync() becomes the same logic. This is the code of MethodAsyc(): internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { MethodAsyncStateMachine methodAsyncStateMachine = new MethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; methodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref methodAsyncStateMachine); return methodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } It just creates and starts a state machine MethodAsyncStateMachine: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { public int State; public AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int> Builder; public int Arg0; public int Arg1; public int Result; private TaskAwaiter<int> awaitor; void IAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext() { try { if (this.State != 0) { this.awaitor = HelperMethods.MethodTask(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaitor.IsCompleted) { this.State = 0; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaitor, ref this); return; } } else { this.State = -1; } this.Result = this.awaitor.GetResult(); } catch (Exception exception) { this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetException(exception); return; } this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetResult(this.Result); } [DebuggerHidden] void IAsyncStateMachine.SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine param0) { this.Builder.SetStateMachine(param0); } } The generated code has been cleaned up so it is readable and can be compiled. Several things can be observed here: The async modifier is gone, which shows, unlike other modifiers (e.g. static), there is no such IL/CLR level “async” stuff. It becomes a AsyncStateMachineAttribute. This is similar to the compilation of extension method. The generated state machine is very similar to the state machine of C# yield syntax sugar. The local variables (arg0, arg1, result) are compiled to fields of the state machine. The real code (await HelperMethods.MethodTask(arg0, arg1)) is compiled into MoveNext(): HelperMethods.MethodTask(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(). CallMethodAsync() will create and start its own state machine CallMethodAsyncStateMachine: internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(CallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> CallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { CallMethodAsyncStateMachine callMethodAsyncStateMachine = new CallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; callMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref callMethodAsyncStateMachine); return callMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } CallMethodAsyncStateMachine has the same logic as MethodAsyncStateMachine above. The detail of the state machine will be discussed soon. Now it is clear that: async /await is a C# level syntax sugar. There is no difference to await a async method or a normal method. A method returning Task will be awaitable. State machine and continuation To demonstrate more details in the state machine, a more complex method is created: internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { HelperMethods.Before(); int resultOfAwait1 = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); int resultOfAwait2 = await MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; return resultToReturn; } } In this method: There are multiple awaits. There are code before the awaits, and continuation code after each await After compilation, this multi-await method becomes the same as above single-await methods: internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine = new MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Arg2 = arg2, Arg3 = arg3, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine); return multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } It creates and starts one single state machine, MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { public int State; public AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int> Builder; public int Arg0; public int Arg1; public int Arg2; public int Arg3; public int ResultOfAwait1; public int ResultOfAwait2; public int ResultToReturn; private TaskAwaiter<int> awaiter; void IAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext() { try { switch (this.State) { case -1: HelperMethods.Before(); this.awaiter = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaiter.IsCompleted) { this.State = 0; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaiter, ref this); } break; case 0: this.ResultOfAwait1 = this.awaiter.GetResult(); HelperMethods.Continuation1(this.ResultOfAwait1); this.awaiter = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg2, this.Arg3).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaiter.IsCompleted) { this.State = 1; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaiter, ref this); } break; case 1: this.ResultOfAwait2 = this.awaiter.GetResult(); HelperMethods.Continuation2(this.ResultOfAwait2); this.ResultToReturn = this.ResultOfAwait1 + this.ResultOfAwait2; this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetResult(this.ResultToReturn); break; } } catch (Exception exception) { this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetException(exception); } } [DebuggerHidden] void IAsyncStateMachine.SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine stateMachine) { this.Builder.SetStateMachine(stateMachine); } } The above code is already cleaned up, but there are still a lot of things. More clean up can be done, and the state machine can be very simple: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { // State: // -1: Begin // 0: 1st await is done // 1: 2nd await is done // ... // -2: End public int State; public TaskCompletionSource<int> ResultToReturn; // int resultToReturn ... public int Arg0; // int Arg0 public int Arg1; // int arg1 public int Arg2; // int arg2 public int Arg3; // int arg3 public int ResultOfAwait1; // int resultOfAwait1 ... public int ResultOfAwait2; // int resultOfAwait2 ... private Task<int> currentTaskToAwait; /// <summary> /// Moves the state machine to its next state. /// </summary> void IAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext() { try { switch (this.State) { // Orginal code is splitted by "case"s: // case -1: // HelperMethods.Before(); // MethodAsync(Arg0, arg1); // case 0: // int resultOfAwait1 = await ... // HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); // MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); // case 1: // int resultOfAwait2 = await ... // HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); // int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; // return resultToReturn; case -1: // -1 is begin. HelperMethods.Before(); // Code before 1st await. this.currentTaskToAwait = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg0, this.Arg1); // 1st task to await // When this.currentTaskToAwait is done, run this.MoveNext() and go to case 0. this.State = 0; IAsyncStateMachine this1 = this; // Cannot use "this" in lambda so create a local variable. this.currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(_ => this1.MoveNext()); // Callback break; case 0: // Now 1st await is done. this.ResultOfAwait1 = this.currentTaskToAwait.Result; // Get 1st await's result. HelperMethods.Continuation1(this.ResultOfAwait1); // Code after 1st await and before 2nd await. this.currentTaskToAwait = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg2, this.Arg3); // 2nd task to await // When this.currentTaskToAwait is done, run this.MoveNext() and go to case 1. this.State = 1; IAsyncStateMachine this2 = this; // Cannot use "this" in lambda so create a local variable. this.currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(_ => this2.MoveNext()); // Callback break; case 1: // Now 2nd await is done. this.ResultOfAwait2 = this.currentTaskToAwait.Result; // Get 2nd await's result. HelperMethods.Continuation2(this.ResultOfAwait2); // Code after 2nd await. int resultToReturn = this.ResultOfAwait1 + this.ResultOfAwait2; // Code after 2nd await. // End with resultToReturn. this.State = -2; // -2 is end. this.ResultToReturn.SetResult(resultToReturn); break; } } catch (Exception exception) { // End with exception. this.State = -2; // -2 is end. this.ResultToReturn.SetException(exception); } } /// <summary> /// Configures the state machine with a heap-allocated replica. /// </summary> /// <param name="stateMachine">The heap-allocated replica.</param> [DebuggerHidden] void IAsyncStateMachine.SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine stateMachine) { // No core logic. } } Only Task and TaskCompletionSource are involved in this version. And MultiCallMethodAsync() can be simplified to: [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync_(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine = new MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Arg2 = arg2, Arg3 = arg3, ResultToReturn = new TaskCompletionSource<int>(), // -1: Begin // 0: 1st await is done // 1: 2nd await is done // ... // -2: End State = -1 }; (multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine as IAsyncStateMachine).MoveNext(); // Original code are in this method. return multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.ResultToReturn.Task; } Now the whole state machine becomes very clear - it is about callback: Original code are split into pieces by “await”s, and each piece is put into each “case” in the state machine. Here the 2 awaits split the code into 3 pieces, so there are 3 “case”s. The “piece”s are chained by callback, that is done by Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(callback), or currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(callback) in the simplified code. A previous “piece” will end with a Task (which is to be awaited), when the task is done, it will callback the next “piece”. The state machine’s state works with the “case”s to ensure the code “piece”s executes one after another. Callback Since it is about callback, the simplification  can go even further – the entire state machine can be completely purged. Now MultiCallMethodAsync() becomes: internal static Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { TaskCompletionSource<int> taskCompletionSource = new TaskCompletionSource<int>(); try { // Oringinal code begins. HelperMethods.Before(); MethodAsync(arg0, arg1).ContinueWith(await1 => { int resultOfAwait1 = await1.Result; HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); MethodAsync(arg2, arg3).ContinueWith(await2 => { int resultOfAwait2 = await2.Result; HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; // Oringinal code ends. taskCompletionSource.SetResult(resultToReturn); }); }); } catch (Exception exception) { taskCompletionSource.SetException(exception); } return taskCompletionSource.Task; } Please compare with the original async / await code: HelperMethods.Before(); int resultOfAwait1 = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); int resultOfAwait2 = await MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; return resultToReturn; Yeah that is the magic of C# async / await: Await is literally pretending to wait. In a await expression, a Task object will be return immediately so that caller is not blocked. The continuation code is compiled as that Task’s callback code. When that task is done, continuation code will execute. Please notice that many details inside the state machine are omitted for simplicity, like context caring, etc. If you want to have a detailed picture, please do check out the source code of AsyncTaskMethodBuilder and TaskAwaiter.

    Read the article

  • Understanding C# async / await (1) Compilation

    - by Dixin
    Now the async / await keywords are in C#. Just like the async and ! in F#, this new C# feature provides great convenience. There are many nice documents talking about how to use async / await in specific scenarios, like using async methods in ASP.NET 4.5 and in ASP.NET MVC 4, etc. In this article we will look at the real code working behind the syntax sugar. According to MSDN: The async modifier indicates that the method, lambda expression, or anonymous method that it modifies is asynchronous. Since lambda expression / anonymous method will be compiled to normal method, we will focus on normal async method. Preparation First of all, Some helper methods need to make up. internal class HelperMethods { internal static int Method(int arg0, int arg1) { // Do some IO. WebClient client = new WebClient(); Enumerable.Repeat("http://weblogs.asp.net/dixin", 10) .Select(client.DownloadString).ToArray(); int result = arg0 + arg1; return result; } internal static Task<int> MethodTask(int arg0, int arg1) { Task<int> task = new Task<int>(() => Method(arg0, arg1)); task.Start(); // Hot task (started task) should always be returned. return task; } internal static void Before() { } internal static void Continuation1(int arg) { } internal static void Continuation2(int arg) { } } Here Method() is a long running method doing some IO. Then MethodTask() wraps it into a Task and return that Task. Nothing special here. Await something in async method Since MethodTask() returns Task, let’s try to await it: internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> MethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { int result = await HelperMethods.MethodTask(arg0, arg1); return result; } } Because we used await in the method, async must be put on the method. Now we get the first async method. According to the naming convenience, it is named MethodAsync. Of course a async method can be awaited. So we have a CallMethodAsync() to call MethodAsync(): internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> CallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { int result = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); return result; } } After compilation, MethodAsync() and CallMethodAsync() becomes the same logic. This is the code of MethodAsyc(): internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { MethodAsyncStateMachine methodAsyncStateMachine = new MethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; methodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref methodAsyncStateMachine); return methodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } It just creates and starts a state machine, MethodAsyncStateMachine: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { public int State; public AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int> Builder; public int Arg0; public int Arg1; public int Result; private TaskAwaiter<int> awaitor; void IAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext() { try { if (this.State != 0) { this.awaitor = HelperMethods.MethodTask(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaitor.IsCompleted) { this.State = 0; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaitor, ref this); return; } } else { this.State = -1; } this.Result = this.awaitor.GetResult(); } catch (Exception exception) { this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetException(exception); return; } this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetResult(this.Result); } [DebuggerHidden] void IAsyncStateMachine.SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine param0) { this.Builder.SetStateMachine(param0); } } The generated code has been refactored, so it is readable and can be compiled. Several things can be observed here: The async modifier is gone, which shows, unlike other modifiers (e.g. static), there is no such IL/CLR level “async” stuff. It becomes a AsyncStateMachineAttribute. This is similar to the compilation of extension method. The generated state machine is very similar to the state machine of C# yield syntax sugar. The local variables (arg0, arg1, result) are compiled to fields of the state machine. The real code (await HelperMethods.MethodTask(arg0, arg1)) is compiled into MoveNext(): HelperMethods.MethodTask(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(). CallMethodAsync() will create and start its own state machine CallMethodAsyncStateMachine: internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(CallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> CallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1) { CallMethodAsyncStateMachine callMethodAsyncStateMachine = new CallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; callMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref callMethodAsyncStateMachine); return callMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } CallMethodAsyncStateMachine has the same logic as MethodAsyncStateMachine above. The detail of the state machine will be discussed soon. Now it is clear that: async /await is a C# language level syntax sugar. There is no difference to await a async method or a normal method. As long as a method returns Task, it is awaitable. State machine and continuation To demonstrate more details in the state machine, a more complex method is created: internal class AsyncMethods { internal static async Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { HelperMethods.Before(); int resultOfAwait1 = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); int resultOfAwait2 = await MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; return resultToReturn; } } In this method: There are multiple awaits. There are code before the awaits, and continuation code after each await After compilation, this multi-await method becomes the same as above single-await methods: internal class CompiledAsyncMethods { [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine = new MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Arg2 = arg2, Arg3 = arg3, Builder = AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int>.Create(), State = -1 }; multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Start(ref multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine); return multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.Builder.Task; } } It creates and starts one single state machine, MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { public int State; public AsyncTaskMethodBuilder<int> Builder; public int Arg0; public int Arg1; public int Arg2; public int Arg3; public int ResultOfAwait1; public int ResultOfAwait2; public int ResultToReturn; private TaskAwaiter<int> awaiter; void IAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext() { try { switch (this.State) { case -1: HelperMethods.Before(); this.awaiter = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg0, this.Arg1).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaiter.IsCompleted) { this.State = 0; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaiter, ref this); } break; case 0: this.ResultOfAwait1 = this.awaiter.GetResult(); HelperMethods.Continuation1(this.ResultOfAwait1); this.awaiter = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg2, this.Arg3).GetAwaiter(); if (!this.awaiter.IsCompleted) { this.State = 1; this.Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(ref this.awaiter, ref this); } break; case 1: this.ResultOfAwait2 = this.awaiter.GetResult(); HelperMethods.Continuation2(this.ResultOfAwait2); this.ResultToReturn = this.ResultOfAwait1 + this.ResultOfAwait2; this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetResult(this.ResultToReturn); break; } } catch (Exception exception) { this.State = -2; this.Builder.SetException(exception); } } [DebuggerHidden] void IAsyncStateMachine.SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine stateMachine) { this.Builder.SetStateMachine(stateMachine); } } Once again, the above state machine code is already refactored, but it still has a lot of things. More clean up can be done if we only keep the core logic, and the state machine can become very simple: [CompilerGenerated] [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Auto)] internal struct MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine : IAsyncStateMachine { // State: // -1: Begin // 0: 1st await is done // 1: 2nd await is done // ... // -2: End public int State; public TaskCompletionSource<int> ResultToReturn; // int resultToReturn ... public int Arg0; // int Arg0 public int Arg1; // int arg1 public int Arg2; // int arg2 public int Arg3; // int arg3 public int ResultOfAwait1; // int resultOfAwait1 ... public int ResultOfAwait2; // int resultOfAwait2 ... private Task<int> currentTaskToAwait; /// <summary> /// Moves the state machine to its next state. /// </summary> public void MoveNext() // IAsyncStateMachine member. { try { switch (this.State) { // Original code is split by "await"s into "case"s: // case -1: // HelperMethods.Before(); // MethodAsync(Arg0, arg1); // case 0: // int resultOfAwait1 = await ... // HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); // MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); // case 1: // int resultOfAwait2 = await ... // HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); // int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; // return resultToReturn; case -1: // -1 is begin. HelperMethods.Before(); // Code before 1st await. this.currentTaskToAwait = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg0, this.Arg1); // 1st task to await // When this.currentTaskToAwait is done, run this.MoveNext() and go to case 0. this.State = 0; MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine that1 = this; // Cannot use "this" in lambda so create a local variable. this.currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(_ => that1.MoveNext()); break; case 0: // Now 1st await is done. this.ResultOfAwait1 = this.currentTaskToAwait.Result; // Get 1st await's result. HelperMethods.Continuation1(this.ResultOfAwait1); // Code after 1st await and before 2nd await. this.currentTaskToAwait = AsyncMethods.MethodAsync(this.Arg2, this.Arg3); // 2nd task to await // When this.currentTaskToAwait is done, run this.MoveNext() and go to case 1. this.State = 1; MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine that2 = this; this.currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(_ => that2.MoveNext()); break; case 1: // Now 2nd await is done. this.ResultOfAwait2 = this.currentTaskToAwait.Result; // Get 2nd await's result. HelperMethods.Continuation2(this.ResultOfAwait2); // Code after 2nd await. int resultToReturn = this.ResultOfAwait1 + this.ResultOfAwait2; // Code after 2nd await. // End with resultToReturn. this.State = -2; // -2 is end. this.ResultToReturn.SetResult(resultToReturn); break; } } catch (Exception exception) { // End with exception. this.State = -2; // -2 is end. this.ResultToReturn.SetException(exception); } } /// <summary> /// Configures the state machine with a heap-allocated replica. /// </summary> /// <param name="stateMachine">The heap-allocated replica.</param> [DebuggerHidden] public void SetStateMachine(IAsyncStateMachine stateMachine) // IAsyncStateMachine member. { // No core logic. } } Only Task and TaskCompletionSource are involved in this version. And MultiCallMethodAsync() can be simplified to: [DebuggerStepThrough] [AsyncStateMachine(typeof(MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine))] // async internal static /*async*/ Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine = new MultiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine() { Arg0 = arg0, Arg1 = arg1, Arg2 = arg2, Arg3 = arg3, ResultToReturn = new TaskCompletionSource<int>(), // -1: Begin // 0: 1st await is done // 1: 2nd await is done // ... // -2: End State = -1 }; multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.MoveNext(); // Original code are moved into this method. return multiCallMethodAsyncStateMachine.ResultToReturn.Task; } Now the whole state machine becomes very clean - it is about callback: Original code are split into pieces by “await”s, and each piece is put into each “case” in the state machine. Here the 2 awaits split the code into 3 pieces, so there are 3 “case”s. The “piece”s are chained by callback, that is done by Builder.AwaitUnsafeOnCompleted(callback), or currentTaskToAwait.ContinueWith(callback) in the simplified code. A previous “piece” will end with a Task (which is to be awaited), when the task is done, it will callback the next “piece”. The state machine’s state works with the “case”s to ensure the code “piece”s executes one after another. Callback If we focus on the point of callback, the simplification  can go even further – the entire state machine can be completely purged, and we can just keep the code inside MoveNext(). Now MultiCallMethodAsync() becomes: internal static Task<int> MultiCallMethodAsync(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { TaskCompletionSource<int> taskCompletionSource = new TaskCompletionSource<int>(); try { // Oringinal code begins. HelperMethods.Before(); MethodAsync(arg0, arg1).ContinueWith(await1 => { int resultOfAwait1 = await1.Result; HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); MethodAsync(arg2, arg3).ContinueWith(await2 => { int resultOfAwait2 = await2.Result; HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; // Oringinal code ends. taskCompletionSource.SetResult(resultToReturn); }); }); } catch (Exception exception) { taskCompletionSource.SetException(exception); } return taskCompletionSource.Task; } Please compare with the original async / await code: HelperMethods.Before(); int resultOfAwait1 = await MethodAsync(arg0, arg1); HelperMethods.Continuation1(resultOfAwait1); int resultOfAwait2 = await MethodAsync(arg2, arg3); HelperMethods.Continuation2(resultOfAwait2); int resultToReturn = resultOfAwait1 + resultOfAwait2; return resultToReturn; Yeah that is the magic of C# async / await: Await is not to wait. In a await expression, a Task object will be return immediately so that execution is not blocked. The continuation code is compiled as that Task’s callback code. When that task is done, continuation code will execute. Please notice that many details inside the state machine are omitted for simplicity, like context caring, etc. If you want to have a detailed picture, please do check out the source code of AsyncTaskMethodBuilder and TaskAwaiter.

    Read the article

  • Slides and Code from “Using C#’s Async Effectively”

    - by Reed
    The slides and code from my talk on the new async language features in C# and VB.Net are now available on https://github.com/ReedCopsey/Effective-Async This includes the complete slide deck, and all 4 projects, including: FakeService: Simple WCF service to run locally and simulate network service calls. AsyncService: Simple WCF service which wraps FakeService to demonstrate converting sync to async SimpleWPFExample: Simplest example of converting a method call to async from a synchronous version AsyncExamples: Windows Store application demonstrating main concepts, pitfalls, tips, and tricks from the slide deck

    Read the article

  • C# 5.0 Async/Await Demo Code

    - by Paulo Morgado
    I’ve published the sample code I use to demonstrate the use of async/await in C# 5.0. You can find it here. Projects PauloMorgado.AyncDemo.WebServer This project is a simple web server implemented as a console application using Microsoft ASP.NET Web API self hosting and serves an image (with a delay) that is accessed by the other projects. This project has a dependency on Json.NET due to the fact the the Microsoft ASP.NET Web API hosting has a dependency on Json.NET. The application must be run on a command prompt with administrative privileges or a urlacl must be added to allow the use of the following command: netsh http add urlacl url=http://+:9090/ user=machine\username To remove the urlacl, just use the following command: netsh http delete urlacl url=http://+:9090/ PauloMorgado.AsyncDemo.WindowsForms This Windows Forms project contains three regions that must be uncommented one at a time: Sync with WebClient This code retrieves the image through a synchronous call using the WebClient class. Async with WebClient This code retrieves the image through an asynchronous call using the WebClient class. Async with HttpClient with cancelation This code retrieves the image through an asynchronous call with cancelation using the HttpClient class. PauloMorgado.AsyncDemo.Wpf This WPF project contains three regions that must be uncommented one at a time: Sync with WebClient This code retrieves the image through a synchronous call using the WebClient class. Async with WebClient This code retrieves the image through an asynchronous call using the WebClient class. Async with HttpClient with cancelation This code retrieves the image through an asynchronous call with cancelation using the HttpClient class.

    Read the article

  • DDD East Anglia, 29th June 2013 - Async Patterns presentation and source code

    - by Liam Westley
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/twickers/archive/2013/07/01/ddd-east-anglia-29th-june-2013---async-patterns-presentation.aspxMany thanks to the team in Cambridge for an awesome first conference DDD East Anglia.  I definitely appreciate how each of the different areas have their own distinctive atmosphere and feel.  Thanks to some great sponsors we enjoyed a great venue and some excellent nibbles. For those who attended my Async my source code and presentation are available on GitHub, https://github.com/westleyl/DDDEastAnglia2013-Async.git If you are new to Git then the easiest client to install is GitHub for Windows, a graphical UI for accessing GitHub. Personally, I also have Git Extensions and Tortoise Git installed. Tortoise Git is the file explorer add-in that works in a familiar manner to TortoiseSVN. As I mentioned during the presentation I have not included the sample data, the music files, in the source code placed on GitHub but I have included instructions on how to download them from http://silents.bandcamp.comand place them in the correct folders. Also, Windows Media Player, by default, does not play Ogg Vorbis and Flac music files, however you can download the codec installer for these, for free, from http://xiph.org/dshow. I have included the .Net 4.0 version of the source code that uses the Microsoft.Bcl.Async NuGet package - once you have got the project from GitHub you will need to install this NuGet package for the code to compile. Load Project into Visual Studio 2012 Access the NuGet package manager (Tools -> Library Package Manager -> Manage NuGet Packages For Solution) Highlight Online and then Search Online for microsoft.bcl.async Click on Install button Resources : You can download the Task-based Asynchronous Pattern white paper by Stephen Toub, which was the inspiration for this presentation from here - http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=19957 Presentation : If you just want the presentation and don’t want to bother with a GitHub login you can download the PowerPoint presentation from here.

    Read the article

  • Why you need to learn async in .NET

    - by PSteele
    I had an opportunity to teach a quick class yesterday about what’s new in .NET 4.0.  One of the topics was the TPL (Task Parallel Library) and how it can make async programming easier.  I also stressed that this is the direction Microsoft is going with for C# 5.0 and learning the TPL will greatly benefit their understanding of the new async stuff.  We had a little time left over and I was able to show some code that uses the Async CTP to accomplish some stuff, but it wasn’t a simple demo that you could jump in to and understand so I thought I’d thrown one together and put it in a blog post. The entire solution file with all of the sample projects is located here. A Simple Example Let’s start with a super-simple example (WindowsApplication01 in the solution). I’ve got a form that displays a label and a button.  When the user clicks the button, I want to start displaying the current time for 15 seconds and then stop. What I’d like to write is this: lblTime.ForeColor = Color.Red; for (var x = 0; x < 15; x++) { lblTime.Text = DateTime.Now.ToString("HH:mm:ss"); Thread.Sleep(1000); } lblTime.ForeColor = SystemColors.ControlText; (Note that I also changed the label’s color while counting – not quite an ILM-level effect, but it adds something to the demo!) As I’m sure most of my readers are aware, you can’t write WinForms code this way.  WinForms apps, by default, only have one thread running and it’s main job is to process messages from the windows message pump (for a more thorough explanation, see my Visual Studio Magazine article on multithreading in WinForms).  If you put a Thread.Sleep in the middle of that code, your UI will be locked up and unresponsive for those 15 seconds.  Not a good UX and something that needs to be fixed.  Sure, I could throw an “Application.DoEvents()” in there, but that’s hacky. The Windows Timer Then I think, “I can solve that.  I’ll use the Windows Timer to handle the timing in the background and simply notify me when the time has changed”.  Let’s see how I could accomplish this with a Windows timer (WindowsApplication02 in the solution): public partial class Form1 : Form { private readonly Timer clockTimer; private int counter;   public Form1() { InitializeComponent(); clockTimer = new Timer {Interval = 1000}; clockTimer.Tick += UpdateLabel; }   private void UpdateLabel(object sender, EventArgs e) { lblTime.Text = DateTime.Now.ToString("HH:mm:ss"); counter++; if (counter == 15) { clockTimer.Enabled = false; lblTime.ForeColor = SystemColors.ControlText; } }   private void cmdStart_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { lblTime.ForeColor = Color.Red; counter = 0; clockTimer.Start(); } } Holy cow – things got pretty complicated here.  I use the timer to fire off a Tick event every second.  Inside there, I can update the label.  Granted, I can’t use a simple for/loop and have to maintain a global counter for the number of iterations.  And my “end” code (when the loop is finished) is now buried inside the bottom of the Tick event (inside an “if” statement).  I do, however, get a responsive application that doesn’t hang or stop repainting while the 15 seconds are ticking away. But doesn’t .NET have something that makes background processing easier? The BackgroundWorker Next I try .NET’s BackgroundWorker component – it’s specifically designed to do processing in a background thread (leaving the UI thread free to process the windows message pump) and allows updates to be performed on the main UI thread (WindowsApplication03 in the solution): public partial class Form1 : Form { private readonly BackgroundWorker worker;   public Form1() { InitializeComponent(); worker = new BackgroundWorker {WorkerReportsProgress = true}; worker.DoWork += StartUpdating; worker.ProgressChanged += UpdateLabel; worker.RunWorkerCompleted += ResetLabelColor; }   private void StartUpdating(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e) { var workerObject = (BackgroundWorker) sender; for (int x = 0; x < 15; x++) { workerObject.ReportProgress(0); Thread.Sleep(1000); } }   private void UpdateLabel(object sender, ProgressChangedEventArgs e) { lblTime.Text = DateTime.Now.ToString("HH:mm:ss"); }   private void ResetLabelColor(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e) { lblTime.ForeColor = SystemColors.ControlText; }   private void cmdStart_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { lblTime.ForeColor = Color.Red; worker.RunWorkerAsync(); } } Well, this got a little better (I think).  At least I now have my simple for/next loop back.  Unfortunately, I’m still dealing with event handlers spread throughout my code to co-ordinate all of this stuff in the right order. Time to look into the future. The async way Using the Async CTP, I can go back to much simpler code (WindowsApplication04 in the solution): private async void cmdStart_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { lblTime.ForeColor = Color.Red; for (var x = 0; x < 15; x++) { lblTime.Text = DateTime.Now.ToString("HH:mm:ss"); await TaskEx.Delay(1000); } lblTime.ForeColor = SystemColors.ControlText; } This code will run just like the Timer or BackgroundWorker versions – fully responsive during the updates – yet is way easier to implement.  In fact, it’s almost a line-for-line copy of the original version of this code.  All of the async plumbing is handled by the compiler and the framework.  My code goes back to representing the “what” of what I want to do, not the “how”. I urge you to download the Async CTP.  All you need is .NET 4.0 and Visual Studio 2010 sp1 – no need to set up a virtual machine with the VS2011 beta (unless, of course, you want to dive right in to the C# 5.0 stuff!).  Starting playing around with this today and see how much easier it will be in the future to write async-enabled applications.

    Read the article

  • Async CTP Refresh for Visual Studio 2010 SP1 Released

    - by Reed
    The Visual Studio team today released an update to the Visual Studio Async CTP which allows it to be used with Visual Studio SP1.  This new CTP includes some very nice new additions over the previous CTP.  The main highlights of this release include: Compatibility with Visual Studio SP1 APIs for Windows Phone 7 Compatibility with non-English installations Compatibility with Visual Studio Express Edition More efficient Async methods due to a change in the API Numerous bug fixes New EULA which allows distribution in production environments Anybody using the Async CTP should consider upgrading to the new version immediately.  For details, visit the Visual Studio Asynchronous Programming page on MSDN.

    Read the article

  • Converting to async,await using async targeting package

    - by e4rthdog
    I have this: private void BtnCheckClick(object sender, EventArgs e) { var a = txtLot.Text; var b = cmbMcu.SelectedItem.ToString(); var c = cmbLocn.SelectedItem.ToString(); btnCheck.BackColor = Color.Red; var task = Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Dal.GetLotAvailabilityF41021(a, b, c)); task.ContinueWith(t => { btnCheck.BackColor = Color.Transparent; lblDescriptionValue.Text = t.Result.Description; lblItemCodeValue.Text = t.Result.Code; lblQuantityValue.Text = t.Result.AvailableQuantity.ToString(); },TaskScheduler .FromCurrentSynchronizationContext() ); LotFocus(true); } and i followed J. Skeet's advice to move into async,await in my .NET 4.0 app. I converted into this: private async void BtnCheckClick(object sender, EventArgs e) { var a = txtLot.Text; var b = cmbMcu.SelectedItem.ToString(); var c = cmbLocn.SelectedItem.ToString(); btnCheck.BackColor = Color.Red; JDEItemLotAvailability itm = await Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Dal.GetLotAvailabilityF41021(a, b, c)); btnCheck.BackColor = Color.Transparent; lblDescriptionValue.Text = itm.Description; lblItemCodeValue.Text = itm.Code; lblQuantityValue.Text = itm.AvailableQuantity.ToString(); LotFocus(true); } It works fine. What confuses me is that i could do it without using Task but just the method of my Dal. But that means that i must have modified my Dal method, which is something i dont want? I would appreciate if someone would explain to me in "plain" words if what i did is optimal or not and why. Thanks P.s. My dal method public bool CheckLotExistF41021(string _lot, string _mcu, string _locn) { using (OleDbConnection con = new OleDbConnection(this.conString)) { OleDbCommand cmd = new OleDbCommand(); cmd.CommandText = "select lilotn from proddta.f41021 " + "where lilotn = ? and trim(limcu) = ? and lilocn= ?"; cmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@lotn", _lot); cmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@mcu", _mcu); cmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@locn", _locn); cmd.Connection = con; con.Open(); OleDbDataReader rdr = cmd.ExecuteReader(); bool _retval = rdr.HasRows; rdr.Close(); con.Close(); return _retval; } }

    Read the article

  • Asynchrony in C# 5: Dataflow Async Logger Sample

    - by javarg
    Check out this (very simple) code examples for TPL Dataflow. Suppose you are developing an Async Logger to register application events to different sinks or log writers. The logger architecture would be as follow: Note how blocks can be composed to achieved desired behavior. The BufferBlock<T> is the pool of log entries to be process whereas linked ActionBlock<TInput> represent the log writers or sinks. The previous composition would allows only one ActionBlock to consume entries at a time. Implementation code would be something similar to (add reference to System.Threading.Tasks.Dataflow.dll in %User Documents%\Microsoft Visual Studio Async CTP\Documentation): TPL Dataflow Logger var bufferBlock = new BufferBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>>(); ActionBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>> infoLogger =     new ActionBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>>(         e => Console.WriteLine("Info: {0}", e.Item2)); ActionBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>> errorLogger =     new ActionBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>>(         e => Console.WriteLine("Error: {0}", e.Item2)); bufferBlock.LinkTo(infoLogger, e => (e.Item1 & LogLevel.Info) != LogLevel.None); bufferBlock.LinkTo(errorLogger, e => (e.Item1 & LogLevel.Error) != LogLevel.None); bufferBlock.Post(new Tuple<LogLevel, string>(LogLevel.Info, "info message")); bufferBlock.Post(new Tuple<LogLevel, string>(LogLevel.Error, "error message")); Note the filter applied to each link (in this case, the Logging Level selects the writer used). We can specify message filters using Predicate functions on each link. Now, the previous sample is useless for a Logger since Logging Level is not exclusive (thus, several writers could be used to process a single message). Let´s use a Broadcast<T> buffer instead of a BufferBlock<T>. Broadcast Logger var bufferBlock = new BroadcastBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>>(     e => new Tuple<LogLevel, string>(e.Item1, e.Item2)); ActionBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>> infoLogger =     new ActionBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>>(         e => Console.WriteLine("Info: {0}", e.Item2)); ActionBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>> errorLogger =     new ActionBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>>(         e => Console.WriteLine("Error: {0}", e.Item2)); ActionBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>> allLogger =     new ActionBlock<Tuple<LogLevel, string>>(     e => Console.WriteLine("All: {0}", e.Item2)); bufferBlock.LinkTo(infoLogger, e => (e.Item1 & LogLevel.Info) != LogLevel.None); bufferBlock.LinkTo(errorLogger, e => (e.Item1 & LogLevel.Error) != LogLevel.None); bufferBlock.LinkTo(allLogger, e => (e.Item1 & LogLevel.All) != LogLevel.None); bufferBlock.Post(new Tuple<LogLevel, string>(LogLevel.Info, "info message")); bufferBlock.Post(new Tuple<LogLevel, string>(LogLevel.Error, "error message")); As this block copies the message to all its outputs, we need to define the copy function in the block constructor. In this case we create a new Tuple, but you can always use the Identity function if passing the same reference to every output. Try both scenarios and compare the results.

    Read the article

  • C# 5 Async, Part 2: Asynchrony Today

    - by Reed
    The .NET Framework has always supported asynchronous operations.  However, different mechanisms for supporting exist throughout the framework.  While there are at least three separate asynchronous patterns used through the framework, only the latest is directly usable with the new Visual Studio Async CTP.  Before delving into details on the new features, I will talk about existing asynchronous code, and demonstrate how to adapt it for use with the new pattern. The first asynchronous pattern used in the .NET framework was the Asynchronous Programming Model (APM).  This pattern was based around callbacks.  A method is used to start the operation.  It typically is named as BeginSomeOperation.  This method is passed a callback defined as an AsyncCallback, and returns an object that implements IAsyncResult.  Later, the IAsyncResult is used in a call to a method named EndSomeOperation, which blocks until completion and returns the value normally directly returned from the synchronous version of the operation.  Often, the EndSomeOperation call would be called from the callback function passed, which allows you to write code that never blocks. While this pattern works perfectly to prevent blocking, it can make quite confusing code, and be difficult to implement.  For example, the sample code provided for FileStream’s BeginRead/EndRead methods is not simple to understand.  In addition, implementing your own asynchronous methods requires creating an entire class just to implement the IAsyncResult. Given the complexity of the APM, other options have been introduced in later versions of the framework.  The next major pattern introduced was the Event-based Asynchronous Pattern (EAP).  This provides a simpler pattern for asynchronous operations.  It works by providing a method typically named SomeOperationAsync, which signals its completion via an event typically named SomeOperationCompleted. The EAP provides a simpler model for asynchronous programming.  It is much easier to understand and use, and far simpler to implement.  Instead of requiring a custom class and callbacks, the standard event mechanism in C# is used directly.  For example, the WebClient class uses this extensively.  A method is used, such as DownloadDataAsync, and the results are returned via the DownloadDataCompleted event. While the EAP is far simpler to understand and use than the APM, it is still not ideal.  By separating your code into method calls and event handlers, the logic of your program gets more complex.  It also typically loses the ability to block until the result is received, which is often useful.  Blocking often requires writing the code to block by hand, which is error prone and adds complexity. As a result, .NET 4 introduced a third major pattern for asynchronous programming.  The Task<T> class introduced a new, simpler concept for asynchrony.  Task and Task<T> effectively represent an operation that will complete at some point in the future.  This is a perfect model for thinking about asynchronous code, and is the preferred model for all new code going forward.  Task and Task<T> provide all of the advantages of both the APM and the EAP models – you have the ability to block on results (via Task.Wait() or Task<T>.Result), and you can stay completely asynchronous via the use of Task Continuations.  In addition, the Task class provides a new model for task composition and error and cancelation handling.  This is a far superior option to the previous asynchronous patterns. The Visual Studio Async CTP extends the Task based asynchronous model, allowing it to be used in a much simpler manner.  However, it requires the use of Task and Task<T> for all operations.

    Read the article

  • C# 5 Async, Part 3: Preparing Existing code For Await

    - by Reed
    While the Visual Studio Async CTP provides a fantastic model for asynchronous programming, it requires code to be implemented in terms of Task and Task<T>.  The CTP adds support for Task-based asynchrony to the .NET Framework methods, and promises to have these implemented directly in the framework in the future.  However, existing code outside the framework will need to be converted to using the Task class prior to being usable via the CTP. Wrapping existing asynchronous code into a Task or Task<T> is, thankfully, fairly straightforward.  There are two main approaches to this. Code written using the Asynchronous Programming Model (APM) is very easy to convert to using Task<T>.  The TaskFactory class provides the tools to directly convert APM code into a method returning a Task<T>.  This is done via the FromAsync method.  This method takes the BeginOperation and EndOperation methods, as well as any parameters and state objects as arguments, and returns a Task<T> directly. For example, we could easily convert the WebRequest BeginGetResponse and EndGetResponse methods into a method which returns a Task<WebResponse> via: Task<WebResponse> task = Task.Factory .FromAsync<WebResponse>( request.BeginGetResponse, request.EndGetResponse, null); .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } Event-based Asynchronous Pattern (EAP) code can also be wrapped into a Task<T>, though this requires a bit more effort than the one line of code above.  This is handled via the TaskCompletionSource<T> class.  MSDN provides a detailed example of using this to wrap an EAP operation into a method returning Task<T>.  It demonstrates handling cancellation and exception handling as well as the basic operation of the asynchronous method itself. The basic form of this operation is typically: Task<YourResult> GetResultAsync() { var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<YourResult>(); // Handle the event, and setup the task results... this.GetResultCompleted += (o,e) => { if (e.Error != null) tcs.TrySetException(e.Error); else if (e.Cancelled) tcs.TrySetCanceled(); else tcs.TrySetResult(e.Result); }; // Call the asynchronous method this.GetResult(); // Return the task from the TaskCompletionSource return tcs.Task; } We can easily use these methods to wrap our own code into a method that returns a Task<T>.  Existing libraries which cannot be edited can be extended via Extension methods.  The CTP uses this technique to add appropriate methods throughout the framework. The suggested naming for these methods is to define these methods as “Task<YourResult> YourClass.YourOperationAsync(…)”.  However, this naming often conflicts with the default naming of the EAP.  If this is the case, the CTP has standardized on using “Task<YourResult> YourClass.YourOperationTaskAsync(…)”. Once we’ve wrapped all of our existing code into operations that return Task<T>, we can begin investigating how the Async CTP can be used with our own code.

    Read the article

  • What to Return with Async CRUD methods

    - by RualStorge
    While there is a similar question focused on Java, I've been in debates with utilizing Task objects. What's the best way to handle returns on CRUD methods (and similar)? Common returns we've seen over the years are: Void (no return unless there is an exception) Boolean (True on Success, False on Failure, exception on unhandled failure) Int or GUID (Return the newly created objects Id, 0 or null on failure, exception on unhandled failure) The updated Object (exception on failure) Result Object (Object that houses the manipulated object's ID, Boolean or status field to with success or failure indicated, Exception information if there was one, etc) The concern comes into play as we've started moving over to utilizing C# 5's Async functionality, and this brought the question up of how we should handle CRUD returns large-scale. In our systems we have a little of everything in regards to what we return, we want to make these returns standardized... Now the question is what is the recommended standard? Is there even a recommended standard yet? (I realize we need to decide our standard, but typically we do so by looking at best practices, see if it makes sense for us and go from there, but here we're not finding much to work with)

    Read the article

  • What to Return with Async CRUD methods C#

    - by RualStorge
    While there is a similar question focused on Java, I've been in debates with utilizing Task objects. What's the best way to handle returns on CRUD methods (and similar)? Common returns we've seen over the years are: Void (no return unless there is an exception) Boolean (True on Success, False on Failure, exception on unhandled failure) Int or GUID (Return the newly created objects Id, 0 or null on failure, exception on unhandled failure) The updated Object (exception on failure) Result Object (Object that houses the manipulated object's ID, Boolean or status field to with success or failure indicated, Exception information if there was one, etc) The concern comes into play as we've started moving over to utilizing C# 5's Async functionality, and this brought the question up of how we should handle CRUD returns large-scale. In our systems we have a little of everything in regards to what we return, we want to make these returns standardized... Now the question is what is the recommended standard? Is there even a recommended standard yet? (I realize we need to decide our standard, but typically we do so by looking at best practices, see if it makes sense for us and go from there, but here we're not finding much to work with)

    Read the article

  • Understanding C# async / await (2) Awaitable / Awaiter Pattern

    - by Dixin
    What is awaitable Part 1 shows that any Task is awaitable. Actually there are other awaitable types. Here is an example: Task<int> task = new Task<int>(() => 0); int result = await task.ConfigureAwait(false); // Returns a ConfiguredTaskAwaitable<TResult>. The returned ConfiguredTaskAwaitable<TResult> struct is awaitable. And it is not Task at all: public struct ConfiguredTaskAwaitable<TResult> { private readonly ConfiguredTaskAwaiter m_configuredTaskAwaiter; internal ConfiguredTaskAwaitable(Task<TResult> task, bool continueOnCapturedContext) { this.m_configuredTaskAwaiter = new ConfiguredTaskAwaiter(task, continueOnCapturedContext); } public ConfiguredTaskAwaiter GetAwaiter() { return this.m_configuredTaskAwaiter; } } It has one GetAwaiter() method. Actually in part 1 we have seen that Task has GetAwaiter() method too: public class Task { public TaskAwaiter GetAwaiter() { return new TaskAwaiter(this); } } public class Task<TResult> : Task { public new TaskAwaiter<TResult> GetAwaiter() { return new TaskAwaiter<TResult>(this); } } Task.Yield() is a another example: await Task.Yield(); // Returns a YieldAwaitable. The returned YieldAwaitable is not Task either: public struct YieldAwaitable { public YieldAwaiter GetAwaiter() { return default(YieldAwaiter); } } Again, it just has one GetAwaiter() method. In this article, we will look at what is awaitable. The awaitable / awaiter pattern By observing different awaitable / awaiter types, we can tell that an object is awaitable if It has a GetAwaiter() method (instance method or extension method); Its GetAwaiter() method returns an awaiter. An object is an awaiter if: It implements INotifyCompletion or ICriticalNotifyCompletion interface; It has an IsCompleted, which has a getter and returns a Boolean; it has a GetResult() method, which returns void, or a result. This awaitable / awaiter pattern is very similar to the iteratable / iterator pattern. Here is the interface definitions of iteratable / iterator: public interface IEnumerable { IEnumerator GetEnumerator(); } public interface IEnumerator { object Current { get; } bool MoveNext(); void Reset(); } public interface IEnumerable<out T> : IEnumerable { IEnumerator<T> GetEnumerator(); } public interface IEnumerator<out T> : IDisposable, IEnumerator { T Current { get; } } In case you are not familiar with the out keyword, please find out the explanation in Understanding C# Covariance And Contravariance (2) Interfaces. The “missing” IAwaitable / IAwaiter interfaces Similar to IEnumerable and IEnumerator interfaces, awaitable / awaiter can be visualized by IAwaitable / IAwaiter interfaces too. This is the non-generic version: public interface IAwaitable { IAwaiter GetAwaiter(); } public interface IAwaiter : INotifyCompletion // or ICriticalNotifyCompletion { // INotifyCompletion has one method: void OnCompleted(Action continuation); // ICriticalNotifyCompletion implements INotifyCompletion, // also has this method: void UnsafeOnCompleted(Action continuation); bool IsCompleted { get; } void GetResult(); } Please notice GetResult() returns void here. Task.GetAwaiter() / TaskAwaiter.GetResult() is of such case. And this is the generic version: public interface IAwaitable<out TResult> { IAwaiter<TResult> GetAwaiter(); } public interface IAwaiter<out TResult> : INotifyCompletion // or ICriticalNotifyCompletion { bool IsCompleted { get; } TResult GetResult(); } Here the only difference is, GetResult() return a result. Task<TResult>.GetAwaiter() / TaskAwaiter<TResult>.GetResult() is of this case. Please notice .NET does not define these IAwaitable / IAwaiter interfaces at all. As an UI designer, I guess the reason is, IAwaitable interface will constraint GetAwaiter() to be instance method. Actually C# supports both GetAwaiter() instance method and GetAwaiter() extension method. Here I use these interfaces only for better visualizing what is awaitable / awaiter. Now, if looking at above ConfiguredTaskAwaitable / ConfiguredTaskAwaiter, YieldAwaitable / YieldAwaiter, Task / TaskAwaiter pairs again, they all “implicitly” implement these “missing” IAwaitable / IAwaiter interfaces. In the next part, we will see how to implement awaitable / awaiter. Await any function / action In C# await cannot be used with lambda. This code: int result = await (() => 0); will cause a compiler error: Cannot await 'lambda expression' This is easy to understand because this lambda expression (() => 0) may be a function or a expression tree. Obviously we mean function here, and we can tell compiler in this way: int result = await new Func<int>(() => 0); It causes an different error: Cannot await 'System.Func<int>' OK, now the compiler is complaining the type instead of syntax. With the understanding of the awaitable / awaiter pattern, Func<TResult> type can be easily made into awaitable. GetAwaiter() instance method, using IAwaitable / IAwaiter interfaces First, similar to above ConfiguredTaskAwaitable<TResult>, a FuncAwaitable<TResult> can be implemented to wrap Func<TResult>: internal struct FuncAwaitable<TResult> : IAwaitable<TResult> { private readonly Func<TResult> function; public FuncAwaitable(Func<TResult> function) { this.function = function; } public IAwaiter<TResult> GetAwaiter() { return new FuncAwaiter<TResult>(this.function); } } FuncAwaitable<TResult> wrapper is used to implement IAwaitable<TResult>, so it has one instance method, GetAwaiter(), which returns a IAwaiter<TResult>, which wraps that Func<TResult> too. FuncAwaiter<TResult> is used to implement IAwaiter<TResult>: public struct FuncAwaiter<TResult> : IAwaiter<TResult> { private readonly Task<TResult> task; public FuncAwaiter(Func<TResult> function) { this.task = new Task<TResult>(function); this.task.Start(); } bool IAwaiter<TResult>.IsCompleted { get { return this.task.IsCompleted; } } TResult IAwaiter<TResult>.GetResult() { return this.task.Result; } void INotifyCompletion.OnCompleted(Action continuation) { new Task(continuation).Start(); } } Now a function can be awaited in this way: int result = await new FuncAwaitable<int>(() => 0); GetAwaiter() extension method As IAwaitable shows, all that an awaitable needs is just a GetAwaiter() method. In above code, FuncAwaitable<TResult> is created as a wrapper of Func<TResult> and implements IAwaitable<TResult>, so that there is a  GetAwaiter() instance method. If a GetAwaiter() extension method  can be defined for Func<TResult>, then FuncAwaitable<TResult> is no longer needed: public static class FuncExtensions { public static IAwaiter<TResult> GetAwaiter<TResult>(this Func<TResult> function) { return new FuncAwaiter<TResult>(function); } } So a Func<TResult> function can be directly awaited: int result = await new Func<int>(() => 0); Using the existing awaitable / awaiter - Task / TaskAwaiter Remember the most frequently used awaitable / awaiter - Task / TaskAwaiter. With Task / TaskAwaiter, FuncAwaitable / FuncAwaiter are no longer needed: public static class FuncExtensions { public static TaskAwaiter<TResult> GetAwaiter<TResult>(this Func<TResult> function) { Task<TResult> task = new Task<TResult>(function); task.Start(); return task.GetAwaiter(); // Returns a TaskAwaiter<TResult>. } } Similarly, with this extension method: public static class ActionExtensions { public static TaskAwaiter GetAwaiter(this Action action) { Task task = new Task(action); task.Start(); return task.GetAwaiter(); // Returns a TaskAwaiter. } } an action can be awaited as well: await new Action(() => { }); Now any function / action can be awaited: await new Action(() => HelperMethods.IO()); // or: await new Action(HelperMethods.IO); If function / action has parameter(s), closure can be used: int arg0 = 0; int arg1 = 1; int result = await new Action(() => HelperMethods.IO(arg0, arg1)); Using Task.Run() The above code is used to demonstrate how awaitable / awaiter can be implemented. Because it is a common scenario to await a function / action, so .NET provides a built-in API: Task.Run(): public class Task2 { public static Task Run(Action action) { // The implementation is similar to: Task task = new Task(action); task.Start(); return task; } public static Task<TResult> Run<TResult>(Func<TResult> function) { // The implementation is similar to: Task<TResult> task = new Task<TResult>(function); task.Start(); return task; } } In reality, this is how we await a function: int result = await Task.Run(() => HelperMethods.IO(arg0, arg1)); and await a action: await Task.Run(() => HelperMethods.IO());

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 4 async child action

    - by ShadowChaser
    I have an ASP.NET MVC 4 application targeting .NET 4.5. One of our child actions makes a call out to a web service using HttpClient. Since we're blocking on IO waiting for the HttpClient response, it makes a great deal of sense to convert the code to the async/await pattern. However, when MVC 4 attempts to execute the child action, we get the following error message: HttpServerUtility.Execute blocked while waiting for an asynchronous operation to complete. At first glance, it appears as though MVC 4 does not support async/await within a child action. The only remaining option is to run using synchronous code and force a "Wait" on the async task. As we all know, touching .Result or .Wait() on an async task in an ASP.NET context will cause an immediate deadlock. My async logic is wrapped in a class library, so I can't use the "await blah.ConfigureAwait(false)" trick. Remember, tagging "async" on the child action and using await causes an error, and that prevents me from configuring the await. I'm painted into a corner at this point. Is there any way to consume async methods in an MVC 4 child action? Seems like a flat out bug with no workarounds.

    Read the article

  • Node.js Adventure - When Node Flying in Wind

    - by Shaun
    In the first post of this series I mentioned some popular modules in the community, such as underscore, async, etc.. I also listed a module named “Wind (zh-CN)”, which is created by one of my friend, Jeff Zhao (zh-CN). Now I would like to use a separated post to introduce this module since I feel it brings a new async programming style in not only Node.js but JavaScript world. If you know or heard about the new feature in C# 5.0 called “async and await”, or you learnt F#, you will find the “Wind” brings the similar async programming experience in JavaScript. By using “Wind”, we can write async code that looks like the sync code. The callbacks, async stats and exceptions will be handled by “Wind” automatically and transparently.   What’s the Problem: Dense “Callback” Phobia Let’s firstly back to my second post in this series. As I mentioned in that post, when we wanted to read some records from SQL Server we need to open the database connection, and then execute the query. In Node.js all IO operation are designed as async callback pattern which means when the operation was done, it will invoke a function which was taken from the last parameter. For example the database connection opening code would be like this. 1: sql.open(connectionString, function(error, conn) { 2: if(error) { 3: // some error handling code 4: } 5: else { 6: // connection opened successfully 7: } 8: }); And then if we need to query the database the code would be like this. It nested in the previous function. 1: sql.open(connectionString, function(error, conn) { 2: if(error) { 3: // some error handling code 4: } 5: else { 6: // connection opened successfully 7: conn.queryRaw(command, function(error, results) { 8: if(error) { 9: // failed to execute this command 10: } 11: else { 12: // records retrieved successfully 13: } 14: }; 15: } 16: }); Assuming if we need to copy some data from this database to another then we need to open another connection and execute the command within the function under the query function. 1: sql.open(connectionString, function(error, conn) { 2: if(error) { 3: // some error handling code 4: } 5: else { 6: // connection opened successfully 7: conn.queryRaw(command, function(error, results) { 8: if(error) { 9: // failed to execute this command 10: } 11: else { 12: // records retrieved successfully 13: target.open(targetConnectionString, function(error, t_conn) { 14: if(error) { 15: // connect failed 16: } 17: else { 18: t_conn.queryRaw(copy_command, function(error, results) { 19: if(error) { 20: // copy failed 21: } 22: else { 23: // and then, what do you want to do now... 24: } 25: }; 26: } 27: }; 28: } 29: }; 30: } 31: }); This is just an example. In the real project the logic would be more complicated. This means our application might be messed up and the business process will be fragged by many callback functions. I would like call this “Dense Callback Phobia”. This might be a challenge how to make code straightforward and easy to read, something like below. 1: try 2: { 3: // open source connection 4: var s_conn = sqlConnect(s_connectionString); 5: // retrieve data 6: var results = sqlExecuteCommand(s_conn, s_command); 7: 8: // open target connection 9: var t_conn = sqlConnect(t_connectionString); 10: // prepare the copy command 11: var t_command = getCopyCommand(results); 12: // execute the copy command 13: sqlExecuteCommand(s_conn, t_command); 14: } 15: catch (ex) 16: { 17: // error handling 18: }   What’s the Problem: Sync-styled Async Programming Similar as the previous problem, the callback-styled async programming model makes the upcoming operation as a part of the current operation, and mixed with the error handling code. So it’s very hard to understand what on earth this code will do. And since Node.js utilizes non-blocking IO mode, we cannot invoke those operations one by one, as they will be executed concurrently. For example, in this post when I tried to copy the records from Windows Azure SQL Database (a.k.a. WASD) to Windows Azure Table Storage, if I just insert the data into table storage one by one and then print the “Finished” message, I will see the message shown before the data had been copied. This is because all operations were executed at the same time. In order to make the copy operation and print operation executed synchronously I introduced a module named “async” and the code was changed as below. 1: async.forEach(results.rows, 2: function (row, callback) { 3: var resource = { 4: "PartitionKey": row[1], 5: "RowKey": row[0], 6: "Value": row[2] 7: }; 8: client.insertEntity(tableName, resource, function (error) { 9: if (error) { 10: callback(error); 11: } 12: else { 13: console.log("entity inserted."); 14: callback(null); 15: } 16: }); 17: }, 18: function (error) { 19: if (error) { 20: error["target"] = "insertEntity"; 21: res.send(500, error); 22: } 23: else { 24: console.log("all done."); 25: res.send(200, "Done!"); 26: } 27: }); It ensured that the “Finished” message will be printed when all table entities had been inserted. But it cannot promise that the records will be inserted in sequence. It might be another challenge to make the code looks like in sync-style? 1: try 2: { 3: forEach(row in rows) { 4: var entity = { /* ... */ }; 5: tableClient.insert(tableName, entity); 6: } 7:  8: console.log("Finished"); 9: } 10: catch (ex) { 11: console.log(ex); 12: }   How “Wind” Helps “Wind” is a JavaScript library which provides the control flow with plain JavaScript for asynchronous programming (and more) without additional pre-compiling steps. It’s available in NPM so that we can install it through “npm install wind”. Now let’s create a very simple Node.js application as the example. This application will take some website URLs from the command arguments and tried to retrieve the body length and print them in console. Then at the end print “Finish”. I’m going to use “request” module to make the HTTP call simple so I also need to install by the command “npm install request”. The code would be like this. 1: var request = require("request"); 2:  3: // get the urls from arguments, the first two arguments are `node.exe` and `fetch.js` 4: var args = process.argv.splice(2); 5:  6: // main function 7: var main = function() { 8: for(var i = 0; i < args.length; i++) { 9: // get the url 10: var url = args[i]; 11: // send the http request and try to get the response and body 12: request(url, function(error, response, body) { 13: if(!error && response.statusCode == 200) { 14: // log the url and the body length 15: console.log( 16: "%s: %d.", 17: response.request.uri.href, 18: body.length); 19: } 20: else { 21: // log error 22: console.log(error); 23: } 24: }); 25: } 26: 27: // finished 28: console.log("Finished"); 29: }; 30:  31: // execute the main function 32: main(); Let’s execute this application. (I made them in multi-lines for better reading.) 1: node fetch.js 2: "http://www.igt.com/us-en.aspx" 3: "http://www.igt.com/us-en/games.aspx" 4: "http://www.igt.com/us-en/cabinets.aspx" 5: "http://www.igt.com/us-en/systems.aspx" 6: "http://www.igt.com/us-en/interactive.aspx" 7: "http://www.igt.com/us-en/social-gaming.aspx" 8: "http://www.igt.com/support.aspx" Below is the output. As you can see the finish message was printed at the beginning, and the pages’ length retrieved in a different order than we specified. This is because in this code the request command, console logging command are executed asynchronously and concurrently. Now let’s introduce “Wind” to make them executed in order, which means it will request the websites one by one, and print the message at the end.   First of all we need to import the “Wind” package and make sure the there’s only one global variant named “Wind”, and ensure it’s “Wind” instead of “wind”. 1: var Wind = require("wind");   Next, we need to tell “Wind” which code will be executed asynchronously so that “Wind” can control the execution process. In this case the “request” operation executed asynchronously so we will create a “Task” by using a build-in helps function in “Wind” named Wind.Async.Task.create. 1: var requestBodyLengthAsync = function(url) { 2: return Wind.Async.Task.create(function(t) { 3: request(url, function(error, response, body) { 4: if(error || response.statusCode != 200) { 5: t.complete("failure", error); 6: } 7: else { 8: var data = 9: { 10: uri: response.request.uri.href, 11: length: body.length 12: }; 13: t.complete("success", data); 14: } 15: }); 16: }); 17: }; The code above created a “Task” from the original request calling code. In “Wind” a “Task” means an operation will be finished in some time in the future. A “Task” can be started by invoke its start() method, but no one knows when it actually will be finished. The Wind.Async.Task.create helped us to create a task. The only parameter is a function where we can put the actual operation in, and then notify the task object it’s finished successfully or failed by using the complete() method. In the code above I invoked the request method. If it retrieved the response successfully I set the status of this task as “success” with the URL and body length. If it failed I set this task as “failure” and pass the error out.   Next, we will change the main() function. In “Wind” if we want a function can be controlled by Wind we need to mark it as “async”. This should be done by using the code below. 1: var main = eval(Wind.compile("async", function() { 2: })); When the application is running, Wind will detect “eval(Wind.compile(“async”, function” and generate an anonymous code from the body of this original function. Then the application will run the anonymous code instead of the original one. In our example the main function will be like this. 1: var main = eval(Wind.compile("async", function() { 2: for(var i = 0; i < args.length; i++) { 3: try 4: { 5: var result = $await(requestBodyLengthAsync(args[i])); 6: console.log( 7: "%s: %d.", 8: result.uri, 9: result.length); 10: } 11: catch (ex) { 12: console.log(ex); 13: } 14: } 15: 16: console.log("Finished"); 17: })); As you can see, when I tried to request the URL I use a new command named “$await”. It tells Wind, the operation next to $await will be executed asynchronously, and the main thread should be paused until it finished (or failed). So in this case, my application will be pause when the first response was received, and then print its body length, then try the next one. At the end, print the finish message.   Finally, execute the main function. The full code would be like this. 1: var request = require("request"); 2: var Wind = require("wind"); 3:  4: var args = process.argv.splice(2); 5:  6: var requestBodyLengthAsync = function(url) { 7: return Wind.Async.Task.create(function(t) { 8: request(url, function(error, response, body) { 9: if(error || response.statusCode != 200) { 10: t.complete("failure", error); 11: } 12: else { 13: var data = 14: { 15: uri: response.request.uri.href, 16: length: body.length 17: }; 18: t.complete("success", data); 19: } 20: }); 21: }); 22: }; 23:  24: var main = eval(Wind.compile("async", function() { 25: for(var i = 0; i < args.length; i++) { 26: try 27: { 28: var result = $await(requestBodyLengthAsync(args[i])); 29: console.log( 30: "%s: %d.", 31: result.uri, 32: result.length); 33: } 34: catch (ex) { 35: console.log(ex); 36: } 37: } 38: 39: console.log("Finished"); 40: })); 41:  42: main().start();   Run our new application. At the beginning we will see the compiled and generated code by Wind. Then we can see the pages were requested one by one, and at the end the finish message was printed. Below is the code Wind generated for us. As you can see the original code, the output code were shown. 1: // Original: 2: function () { 3: for(var i = 0; i < args.length; i++) { 4: try 5: { 6: var result = $await(requestBodyLengthAsync(args[i])); 7: console.log( 8: "%s: %d.", 9: result.uri, 10: result.length); 11: } 12: catch (ex) { 13: console.log(ex); 14: } 15: } 16: 17: console.log("Finished"); 18: } 19:  20: // Compiled: 21: /* async << function () { */ (function () { 22: var _builder_$0 = Wind.builders["async"]; 23: return _builder_$0.Start(this, 24: _builder_$0.Combine( 25: _builder_$0.Delay(function () { 26: /* var i = 0; */ var i = 0; 27: /* for ( */ return _builder_$0.For(function () { 28: /* ; i < args.length */ return i < args.length; 29: }, function () { 30: /* ; i ++) { */ i ++; 31: }, 32: /* try { */ _builder_$0.Try( 33: _builder_$0.Delay(function () { 34: /* var result = $await(requestBodyLengthAsync(args[i])); */ return _builder_$0.Bind(requestBodyLengthAsync(args[i]), function (result) { 35: /* console.log("%s: %d.", result.uri, result.length); */ console.log("%s: %d.", result.uri, result.length); 36: return _builder_$0.Normal(); 37: }); 38: }), 39: /* } catch (ex) { */ function (ex) { 40: /* console.log(ex); */ console.log(ex); 41: return _builder_$0.Normal(); 42: /* } */ }, 43: null 44: ) 45: /* } */ ); 46: }), 47: _builder_$0.Delay(function () { 48: /* console.log("Finished"); */ console.log("Finished"); 49: return _builder_$0.Normal(); 50: }) 51: ) 52: ); 53: /* } */ })   How Wind Works Someone may raise a big concern when you find I utilized “eval” in my code. Someone may assume that Wind utilizes “eval” to execute some code dynamically while “eval” is very low performance. But I would say, Wind does NOT use “eval” to run the code. It only use “eval” as a flag to know which code should be compiled at runtime. When the code was firstly been executed, Wind will check and find “eval(Wind.compile(“async”, function”. So that it knows this function should be compiled. Then it utilized parse-js to analyze the inner JavaScript and generated the anonymous code in memory. Then it rewrite the original code so that when the application was running it will use the anonymous one instead of the original one. Since the code generation was done at the beginning of the application was started, in the future no matter how long our application runs and how many times the async function was invoked, it will use the generated code, no need to generate again. So there’s no significant performance hurt when using Wind.   Wind in My Previous Demo Let’s adopt Wind into one of my previous demonstration and to see how it helps us to make our code simple, straightforward and easy to read and understand. In this post when I implemented the functionality that copied the records from my WASD to table storage, the logic would be like this. 1, Open database connection. 2, Execute a query to select all records from the table. 3, Recreate the table in Windows Azure table storage. 4, Create entities from each of the records retrieved previously, and then insert them into table storage. 5, Finally, show message as the HTTP response. But as the image below, since there are so many callbacks and async operations, it’s very hard to understand my logic from the code. Now let’s use Wind to rewrite our code. First of all, of course, we need the Wind package. Then we need to include the package files into project and mark them as “Copy always”. Add the Wind package into the source code. Pay attention to the variant name, you must use “Wind” instead of “wind”. 1: var express = require("express"); 2: var async = require("async"); 3: var sql = require("node-sqlserver"); 4: var azure = require("azure"); 5: var Wind = require("wind"); Now we need to create some async functions by using Wind. All async functions should be wrapped so that it can be controlled by Wind which are open database, retrieve records, recreate table (delete and create) and insert entity in table. Below are these new functions. All of them are created by using Wind.Async.Task.create. 1: sql.openAsync = function (connectionString) { 2: return Wind.Async.Task.create(function (t) { 3: sql.open(connectionString, function (error, conn) { 4: if (error) { 5: t.complete("failure", error); 6: } 7: else { 8: t.complete("success", conn); 9: } 10: }); 11: }); 12: }; 13:  14: sql.queryAsync = function (conn, query) { 15: return Wind.Async.Task.create(function (t) { 16: conn.queryRaw(query, function (error, results) { 17: if (error) { 18: t.complete("failure", error); 19: } 20: else { 21: t.complete("success", results); 22: } 23: }); 24: }); 25: }; 26:  27: azure.recreateTableAsync = function (tableName) { 28: return Wind.Async.Task.create(function (t) { 29: client.deleteTable(tableName, function (error, successful, response) { 30: console.log("delete table finished"); 31: client.createTableIfNotExists(tableName, function (error, successful, response) { 32: console.log("create table finished"); 33: if (error) { 34: t.complete("failure", error); 35: } 36: else { 37: t.complete("success", null); 38: } 39: }); 40: }); 41: }); 42: }; 43:  44: azure.insertEntityAsync = function (tableName, entity) { 45: return Wind.Async.Task.create(function (t) { 46: client.insertEntity(tableName, entity, function (error, entity, response) { 47: if (error) { 48: t.complete("failure", error); 49: } 50: else { 51: t.complete("success", null); 52: } 53: }); 54: }); 55: }; Then in order to use these functions we will create a new function which contains all steps for data copying. 1: var copyRecords = eval(Wind.compile("async", function (req, res) { 2: try { 3: } 4: catch (ex) { 5: console.log(ex); 6: res.send(500, "Internal error."); 7: } 8: })); Let’s execute steps one by one with the “$await” keyword introduced by Wind so that it will be invoked in sequence. First is to open the database connection. 1: var copyRecords = eval(Wind.compile("async", function (req, res) { 2: try { 3: // connect to the windows azure sql database 4: var conn = $await(sql.openAsync(connectionString)); 5: console.log("connection opened"); 6: } 7: catch (ex) { 8: console.log(ex); 9: res.send(500, "Internal error."); 10: } 11: })); Then retrieve all records from the database connection. 1: var copyRecords = eval(Wind.compile("async", function (req, res) { 2: try { 3: // connect to the windows azure sql database 4: var conn = $await(sql.openAsync(connectionString)); 5: console.log("connection opened"); 6: // retrieve all records from database 7: var results = $await(sql.queryAsync(conn, "SELECT * FROM [Resource]")); 8: console.log("records selected. count = %d", results.rows.length); 9: } 10: catch (ex) { 11: console.log(ex); 12: res.send(500, "Internal error."); 13: } 14: })); After recreated the table, we need to create the entities and insert them into table storage. 1: var copyRecords = eval(Wind.compile("async", function (req, res) { 2: try { 3: // connect to the windows azure sql database 4: var conn = $await(sql.openAsync(connectionString)); 5: console.log("connection opened"); 6: // retrieve all records from database 7: var results = $await(sql.queryAsync(conn, "SELECT * FROM [Resource]")); 8: console.log("records selected. count = %d", results.rows.length); 9: if (results.rows.length > 0) { 10: // recreate the table 11: $await(azure.recreateTableAsync(tableName)); 12: console.log("table created"); 13: // insert records in table storage one by one 14: for (var i = 0; i < results.rows.length; i++) { 15: var entity = { 16: "PartitionKey": results.rows[i][1], 17: "RowKey": results.rows[i][0], 18: "Value": results.rows[i][2] 19: }; 20: $await(azure.insertEntityAsync(tableName, entity)); 21: console.log("entity inserted"); 22: } 23: } 24: } 25: catch (ex) { 26: console.log(ex); 27: res.send(500, "Internal error."); 28: } 29: })); Finally, send response back to the browser. 1: var copyRecords = eval(Wind.compile("async", function (req, res) { 2: try { 3: // connect to the windows azure sql database 4: var conn = $await(sql.openAsync(connectionString)); 5: console.log("connection opened"); 6: // retrieve all records from database 7: var results = $await(sql.queryAsync(conn, "SELECT * FROM [Resource]")); 8: console.log("records selected. count = %d", results.rows.length); 9: if (results.rows.length > 0) { 10: // recreate the table 11: $await(azure.recreateTableAsync(tableName)); 12: console.log("table created"); 13: // insert records in table storage one by one 14: for (var i = 0; i < results.rows.length; i++) { 15: var entity = { 16: "PartitionKey": results.rows[i][1], 17: "RowKey": results.rows[i][0], 18: "Value": results.rows[i][2] 19: }; 20: $await(azure.insertEntityAsync(tableName, entity)); 21: console.log("entity inserted"); 22: } 23: // send response 24: console.log("all done"); 25: res.send(200, "All done!"); 26: } 27: } 28: catch (ex) { 29: console.log(ex); 30: res.send(500, "Internal error."); 31: } 32: })); If we compared with the previous code we will find now it became more readable and much easy to understand. It’s very easy to know what this function does even though without any comments. When user go to URL “/was/copyRecords” we will execute the function above. The code would be like this. 1: app.get("/was/copyRecords", function (req, res) { 2: copyRecords(req, res).start(); 3: }); And below is the logs printed in local compute emulator console. As we can see the functions executed one by one and then finally the response back to me browser.   Scaffold Functions in Wind Wind provides not only the async flow control and compile functions, but many scaffold methods as well. We can build our async code more easily by using them. I’m going to introduce some basic scaffold functions here. In the code above I created some functions which wrapped from the original async function such as open database, create table, etc.. All of them are very similar, created a task by using Wind.Async.Task.create, return error or result object through Task.complete function. In fact, Wind provides some functions for us to create task object from the original async functions. If the original async function only has a callback parameter, we can use Wind.Async.Binding.fromCallback method to get the task object directly. For example the code below returned the task object which wrapped the file exist check function. 1: var Wind = require("wind"); 2: var fs = require("fs"); 3:  4: fs.existsAsync = Wind.Async.Binding.fromCallback(fs.exists); In Node.js a very popular async function pattern is that, the first parameter in the callback function represent the error object, and the other parameters is the return values. In this case we can use another build-in function in Wind named Wind.Async.Binding.fromStandard. For example, the open database function can be created from the code below. 1: sql.openAsync = Wind.Async.Binding.fromStandard(sql.open); 2:  3: /* 4: sql.openAsync = function (connectionString) { 5: return Wind.Async.Task.create(function (t) { 6: sql.open(connectionString, function (error, conn) { 7: if (error) { 8: t.complete("failure", error); 9: } 10: else { 11: t.complete("success", conn); 12: } 13: }); 14: }); 15: }; 16: */ When I was testing the scaffold functions under Wind.Async.Binding I found for some functions, such as the Azure SDK insert entity function, cannot be processed correctly. So I personally suggest writing the wrapped method manually.   Another scaffold method in Wind is the parallel tasks coordination. In this example, the steps of open database, retrieve records and recreated table should be invoked one by one, but it can be executed in parallel when copying data from database to table storage. In Wind there’s a scaffold function named Task.whenAll which can be used here. Task.whenAll accepts a list of tasks and creates a new task. It will be returned only when all tasks had been completed, or any errors occurred. For example in the code below I used the Task.whenAll to make all copy operation executed at the same time. 1: var copyRecordsInParallel = eval(Wind.compile("async", function (req, res) { 2: try { 3: // connect to the windows azure sql database 4: var conn = $await(sql.openAsync(connectionString)); 5: console.log("connection opened"); 6: // retrieve all records from database 7: var results = $await(sql.queryAsync(conn, "SELECT * FROM [Resource]")); 8: console.log("records selected. count = %d", results.rows.length); 9: if (results.rows.length > 0) { 10: // recreate the table 11: $await(azure.recreateTableAsync(tableName)); 12: console.log("table created"); 13: // insert records in table storage in parallal 14: var tasks = new Array(results.rows.length); 15: for (var i = 0; i < results.rows.length; i++) { 16: var entity = { 17: "PartitionKey": results.rows[i][1], 18: "RowKey": results.rows[i][0], 19: "Value": results.rows[i][2] 20: }; 21: tasks[i] = azure.insertEntityAsync(tableName, entity); 22: } 23: $await(Wind.Async.Task.whenAll(tasks)); 24: // send response 25: console.log("all done"); 26: res.send(200, "All done!"); 27: } 28: } 29: catch (ex) { 30: console.log(ex); 31: res.send(500, "Internal error."); 32: } 33: })); 34:  35: app.get("/was/copyRecordsInParallel", function (req, res) { 36: copyRecordsInParallel(req, res).start(); 37: });   Besides the task creation and coordination, Wind supports the cancellation solution so that we can send the cancellation signal to the tasks. It also includes exception solution which means any exceptions will be reported to the caller function.   Summary In this post I introduced a Node.js module named Wind, which created by my friend Jeff Zhao. As you can see, different from other async library and framework, adopted the idea from F# and C#, Wind utilizes runtime code generation technology to make it more easily to write async, callback-based functions in a sync-style way. By using Wind there will be almost no callback, and the code will be very easy to understand. Currently Wind is still under developed and improved. There might be some problems but the author, Jeff, should be very happy and enthusiastic to learn your problems, feedback, suggestion and comments. You can contact Jeff by - Email: [email protected] - Group: https://groups.google.com/d/forum/windjs - GitHub: https://github.com/JeffreyZhao/wind/issues   Source code can be download here.   Hope this helps, Shaun All documents and related graphics, codes are provided "AS IS" without warranty of any kind. Copyright © Shaun Ziyan Xu. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

    Read the article

  • What is the right pattern for a async data fetching method in .net async/await

    - by s093294
    Given a class with a method GetData. A few other clients call GetData, and instead of it fetching data each time, i would like to create a pattern where the first call starts the task to get the data, and the rest of the calls wait for the task to complete. private Task<string> _data; private async Task<string> _getdata() { return "my random data from the net"; //get_data_from_net() } public string GetData() { if(_data==null) _data=_getdata(); _data.wait(); //are there not a problem here. cant wait a task that is already completed ? if(_data.status != rantocompletion) _data.wait() is not any better, it might complete between the check and the _data.wait? return _data.Result; } How would i do the pattern correctly? (Solution) private static object _servertime_lock = new object(); private static Task<string> _servertime; private static async Task<string> servertime() { try { var thetvdb = new HttpClient(); thetvdb.Timeout = TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5); // var st = await thetvdb.GetStreamAsync("http://www.thetvdb.com/api/Updates.php?type=none"); var response = await thetvdb.GetAsync("http://www.thetvdb.com/api/Updates.php?type=none"); response.EnsureSuccessStatusCode(); Stream stream = await response.Content.ReadAsStreamAsync(); XDocument xdoc = XDocument.Load(stream); return xdoc.Descendants("Time").First().Value; } catch { return null; } } public static async Task<string> GetServerTime() { lock (_servertime_lock) { if (_servertime == null) _servertime = servertime(); } var time = await _servertime; if (time == null) _servertime = null; return time; }

    Read the article

  • F# Async problem.

    - by chrisdew
    Hi, I've written a dummy http server as an exercise in F#. I'm using Mono 2.4.4 on Ubuntu 10.04 x86_64, with MonoDevelop. The following code fails to compile with the error: Error FS0039: The field, constructor or member 'Spawn' is not defined (FS0039) Could someone try this in VisualStudio please, I don't know whether this is a Mono problem, or my problem. I have tried several Async examples from the F# book, and they also all produce similar messages about Async.* methods. Thanks, Chris. #light open System open System.IO open System.Threading open System.Net open System.Net.Sockets open Microsoft.FSharp.Control.CommonExtensions printfn "%s" "Hello World!" let headers = System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes("HTTP/1.0 200 OK\r\nContent-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8\r\nContent-Length: 37\r\nDate: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 05:30:00 GMT\r\nServer: FSC/0.0.1\r\n\r\n") let content = System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes("<html><body>Hello World</body></html>") let serveAsync (client : TcpClient) = async { let out = client.GetStream() do! out.AsyncWrite(headers) do! Async.Sleep 3000 do! out.AsyncWrite(content) do out.Close() } let http_server (ip, port) = let server = new TcpListener(IPAddress.Parse(ip),port) server.Start() while true do let client = server.AcceptTcpClient() printfn "new client" Async.Spawn (serveAsync client) http_server ("0.0.0.0", 1234)

    Read the article

  • Need help regarding Async and fsi

    - by Stringer Bell
    I'd like to write some code that runs a sequence of F# scripts (.fsx). The thing is that I could have literally hundreds of scripts and if I do that: let shellExecute program args = let startInfo = new ProcessStartInfo() do startInfo.FileName <- program do startInfo.Arguments <- args do startInfo.UseShellExecute <- true do startInfo.WindowStyle <- ProcessWindowStyle.Hidden //do printfn "%s" startInfo.Arguments let proc = Process.Start(startInfo) () scripts |> Seq.iter (shellExecute "fsi") it could stress too much my 2GB system. Anyway, I'd like to run scripts by batch of n, which seems also a good exercise for learning Async (I guess it's the way to go). I have written some code and unfortunately it doesn't work: open System.Diagnostics let p = shellExecute "fsi" @"C:\Users\Stringer\foo.fsx" async { let! exit = Async.AwaitEvent p.Exited do printfn "process has exited" } |> Async.StartImmediate foo.fsx is just a hello world script. I'd like also to figure out if it's doable to retrieve a return code for each executing script and if not, find another way. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Asynchrony in C# 5 (Part I)

    - by javarg
    I’ve been playing around with the new Async CTP preview available for download from Microsoft. It’s amazing how language trends are influencing the evolution of Microsoft’s developing platform. Much effort is being done at language level today than previous versions of .NET. In these post series I’ll review some major features contained in this release: Asynchronous functions TPL Dataflow Task based asynchronous Pattern Part I: Asynchronous Functions This is a mean of expressing asynchronous operations. This kind of functions must return void or Task/Task<> (functions returning void let us implement Fire & Forget asynchronous operations). The two new keywords introduced are async and await. async: marks a function as asynchronous, indicating that some part of its execution may take place some time later (after the method call has returned). Thus, all async functions must include some kind of asynchronous operations. This keyword on its own does not make a function asynchronous thought, its nature depends on its implementation. await: allows us to define operations inside a function that will be awaited for continuation (more on this later). Async function sample: Async/Await Sample async void ShowDateTimeAsync() {     while (true)     {         var client = new ServiceReference1.Service1Client();         var dt = await client.GetDateTimeTaskAsync();         Console.WriteLine("Current DateTime is: {0}", dt);         await TaskEx.Delay(1000);     } } The previous sample is a typical usage scenario for these new features. Suppose we query some external Web Service to get data (in this case the current DateTime) and we do so at regular intervals in order to refresh user’s UI. Note the async and await functions working together. The ShowDateTimeAsync method indicate its asynchronous nature to the caller using the keyword async (that it may complete after returning control to its caller). The await keyword indicates the flow control of the method will continue executing asynchronously after client.GetDateTimeTaskAsync returns. The latter is the most important thing to understand about the behavior of this method and how this actually works. The flow control of the method will be reconstructed after any asynchronous operation completes (specified with the keyword await). This reconstruction of flow control is the real magic behind the scene and it is done by C#/VB compilers. Note how we didn’t use any of the regular existing async patterns and we’ve defined the method very much like a synchronous one. Now, compare the following code snippet  in contrast to the previuous async/await: Traditional UI Async void ComplicatedShowDateTime() {     var client = new ServiceReference1.Service1Client();     client.GetDateTimeCompleted += (s, e) =>     {         Console.WriteLine("Current DateTime is: {0}", e.Result);         client.GetDateTimeAsync();     };     client.GetDateTimeAsync(); } The previous implementation is somehow similar to the first shown, but more complicated. Note how the while loop is implemented as a chained callback to the same method (client.GetDateTimeAsync) inside the event handler (please, do not do this in your own application, this is just an example).  How it works? Using an state workflow (or jump table actually), the compiler expands our code and create the necessary steps to execute it, resuming pending operations after any asynchronous one. The intention of the new Async/Await pattern is to let us think and code as we normally do when designing and algorithm. It also allows us to preserve the logical flow control of the program (without using any tricky coding patterns to accomplish this). The compiler will then create the necessary workflow to execute operations as the happen in time.

    Read the article

  • What's the best practice for async APIs that return futures on Scala?

    - by Maurício Linhares
    I have started a project to write an async PostgreSQL driver on Scala and to be async, I need to accept callbacks and use futures, but then accepting a callback and a future makes the code cumbersome because you always have to send a callback even if it is useless. Here's a test: "insert a row in the database" in { withHandler { (handler, future) => future.get(5, TimeUnit.SECONDS) handler.sendQuery( this.create ){ query => }.get( 5, TimeUnit.SECONDS ) handler.sendQuery( this.insert ){ query => }.get( 5, TimeUnit.SECONDS ).rowsAffected === 1 } } Sending the empty callback is horrible but I couldn't find a way to make it optional or anything like that, so right now I don't have a lot of ideas on how this external API should look like. It could be something like: handler.sendQuery( this.create ).addListener { query => println(query) } But then again, I'm not sure how people are organizing API's in this regard. Providing examples in other projects would also be great.

    Read the article

  • Async Call To Services

    - by Pita.O
    Hi Is there any time it would not be a good idea to call web services async? My data layer is a REST-based interface and I thinking of adopting an async-only approach to all the CRUD in the system. Is there anything I should know?

    Read the article

  • Making Ninject Interceptors work with async methods

    - by captncraig
    I am starting to work with ninject interceptors to wrap some of my async code with various behaviors and am having some trouble getting everything working. Here is an interceptor I am working with: public class MyInterceptor : IInterceptor { public async void Intercept(IInvocation invocation) { try { invocation.Proceed(); //check that method indeed returns Task await (Task) invocation.ReturnValue; RecordSuccess(); } catch (Exception) { RecordError(); invocation.ReturnValue = _defaultValue; throw; } } This appears to run properly in most normal cases. I am not sure if this will do what I expect. Although it appears to return control flow to the caller asynchronously, I am still a bit worried about the possibility that the proxy is unintentionally blocking a thread or something. That aside, I cannot get the exception handling working. For this test case: [Test] public void ExceptionThrown() { try { var interceptor = new MyInterceptor(DefaultValue); var invocation = new Mock<IInvocation>(); invocation.Setup(x => x.Proceed()).Throws<InvalidOperationException>(); interceptor.Intercept(invocation.Object); } catch (Exception e) { } } I can see in the interceptor that the catch block is hit, but the catch block in my test is never hit from the rethrow. I am more confused because there is no proxy or anything here, just pretty simple mocks and objects. I also tried something like Task.Run(() => interceptor.Intercept(invocation.Object)).Wait(); in my test, and still no change. The test passes happily, but the nUnit output does have the exception message. I imagine I am messing something up, and I don't quite understand what is going on as much as I think I do. Is there a better way to intercept an async method? What am I doing wrong with regards to exception handling?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >