Search Results

Search found 958 results on 39 pages for 'dispose'.

Page 4/39 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Form gets disposed somehow

  - by mnn

  I have a client-server application, in which I use classic Sockets and threads for receiving/sending data and listening for clients. The application works fine, but after some random time I get the ObjectDisposedException: System.ObjectDisposedException: Cannot access a disposed object. Object name: 'MainForm'. at System.Windows.Forms.Control.MarshaledInvoke(Control caller, Delegate method, Object[] args, Boolean synchronous) at System.Windows.Forms.Control.Invoke(Delegate method, Object[] args) at System.Windows.Forms.Control.Invoke(Delegate method) That code is called from client Socket thread and I use Invoke() method to run the code on UI thread. I'm sure that I don't manually dispose the form nor using Close() (form is closed by user clicking Close button), so I don't know what could cause its disposing.

  Read the article

• How to 'destroy/dispose' frame% in plt-scheme?

  - by Thura

  I want to destory my previously shown frame when a certain event is triggered. I can't find anything regarding this in the reference manual.

  Read the article

• How to dispose of variables in windows close button

  - by cmrhema

  Hi, I have a windows forms application, where I have declared some static variables. On the click of exit button, I have disposed of some datatable which i have declared static. Many a times the user instead of clicking the exit button, will just exit the windows application by clicking the X button on the left corner top. What should be done to ensure that even if the user clicks the X button, everything is disposed of properly. Thanks Regards Hema

  Read the article

• Avoiding dispose of underlying stream

  - by danbystrom

  I'm attempting to mock some file operations. In the "real" object I have: StreamWriter createFile( string name ) { return new StreamWriter( Path.Combine( _outFolder, name ), false, Encoding.UTF8 ) ); } In the mock object I'd like to have: StreamWriter createFile( string name ) { var ms = new MemoryStream(); _files.Add( Path.Combine( _outFolder, name ), ms ); return new StreamWriter( ms, Encoding.UTF8 ) ); } where _files is a dictionary to store created files for later inspection. However, when the consumer closes the StreamWriter, it also disposes the MeamoryStream... :-( Any thoughts on how to pursue this?

  Read the article

• Using using to dispose of nested objects

  - by TooFat

  If I have code with nested objects like this do I need to use the nested using statements to make sure that both the SQLCommand and the SQLConnection objects are disposed of properly like shown below or am I ok if the code that instantiates the SQLCommand is within the outer using statement. using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection(sqlConnString)) { using (System.Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand cmd = new System.Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand()) { cmd.CommandType = CommandType.Text; cmd.CommandText = cmdTextHere; conn.Open(); cmd.Connection = conn; rowsAffected = cmd.ExecuteNonQuery(); } }

  Read the article

• How to properly dispose of an object

  - by VoodooChild

  Hi Guys, I am experiencing something weird and have a workaround already, but I don't think I understood it well. If I call the Method below numerous times within a class: public void Method() { Foo a = new Foo(); a.Delegate1Handler = ViewSomething(); } So I am reinitializing "a" every time but for some reason a.Delegate1Handler is still around from the previous initialization, and therefore ViewSomething() is called again and again and again.... I feel like I am forgetting something critical here? Foo's guts look like: public delegate void Delegate1(T t); public Delegate1 Delegate1Handler { get; set; }

  Read the article

• System.Threading.Timer keep reference to it.

  - by Daniel Bryars

  According to [http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.threading.timer.aspx][1] you need to keep a reference to a System.Threading.Timer to prevent it from being disposed. I've got a method like this: private void Delay(Action action, Int32 ms) { if (ms <= 0) { action(); } System.Threading.Timer timer = new System.Threading.Timer( (o) => action(), null, ms, System.Threading.Timeout.Infinite); } Which I don't think keeps a reference to the timer, I've not seen any problems so far, but that's probably because the delay periods used have been pretty small. Is the code above wrong? And if it is, how to I keep a reference to the Timer? I'm thinking something like this might work: class timerstate { internal volatile System.Threading.Timer Timer; }; private void Delay2(Action action, Int32 ms) { if (ms <= 0) { action(); } timerstate state = new timerstate(); lock (state) { state.Timer = new System.Threading.Timer( (o) => { lock (o) { action(); ((timerstate)o).Timer.Dispose(); } }, state, ms, System.Threading.Timeout.Infinite); } The locking business is so I can get the timer into the timerstate class before the delegate gets invoked. It all looks a little clunky to me. Perhaps I should regard the chance of the timer firing before it's finished constructing and assigned to the property in the timerstace instance as negligible and leave the locking out.

  Read the article

• Do COM Dll References Require Manual Disposal? If so, How?

  - by Drew

  I have written some code in VB that verifies that a particular port in the Windows Firewall is open, and opens one otherwise. The code uses references to three COM DLLs. I wrote a WindowsFirewall class, which Imports the primary namespace defined by the DLLs. Within members of the WindowsFirewall class I construct some of the types defined by the DLLs referenced. The following code isn't the entire class, but demonstrates what I am doing. Imports NetFwTypeLib Public Class WindowsFirewall Public Shared Function IsFirewallEnabled as Boolean Dim icfMgr As INetFwMgr icfMgr = CType(System.Activator.CreateInstance(Type.GetTypeFromProgID("HNetCfg.FwMgr")), INetFwMgr) Dim profile As INetFwProfile profile = icfMgr.LocalPolicy.CurrentProfile Dim fIsFirewallEnabled as Boolean fIsFirewallEnabled = profile.FirewallEnabled return fIsFirewallEnabled End Function End Class I do not reference COM DLLs very often. I have read that unmanaged code may not be cleaned up by the garbage collector and I would like to know how to make sure that I have not introduced any memory leaks. Please tell me (a) if I have introduced a memory leak, and (b) how I may clean it up. (My theory is that the icfMgr and profile objects do allocate memory that remains unreleased until after the application closes. I am hopeful that setting their references equal to nothing will mark them for garbage collection, since I can find no other way to dispose of them. Neither one implements IDisposable, and neither contains a Finalize method. I suspect they may not even be relevant here, and that both of those methods of releasing memory only apply to .Net types.)

  Read the article

• Resource Acquisition is Initialization in C#

  - by codeWithoutFear

  Resource Acquisition Is Initialization (RAII) is a pattern I grew to love when working in C++.  It is perfectly suited for resource management such as matching all those pesky new's and delete's.  One of my goals was to limit the explicit deallocation statements I had to write.  Often these statements became victims of run-time control flow changes (i.e. exceptions, unhappy path) or development-time code refactoring. The beauty of RAII is realized by tying your resource creation (acquisition) to the construction (initialization) of a class instance.  Then bind the resource deallocation to the destruction of that instance.  That is well and good in a language with strong destructor semantics like C++, but languages like C# that run on garbage-collecting runtimes don't provide the same instance lifetime guarantees. Here is a class and sample that combines a few features of C# to provide an RAII-like solution: using System; namespace RAII { public class DisposableDelegate : IDisposable { private Action dispose; public DisposableDelegate(Action dispose) { if (dispose == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("dispose"); } this.dispose = dispose; } public void Dispose() { if (this.dispose != null) { Action d = this.dispose; this.dispose = null; d(); } } } class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Console.Out.WriteLine("Some resource allocated here."); using (new DisposableDelegate(() => Console.Out.WriteLine("Resource deallocated here."))) { Console.Out.WriteLine("Resource used here."); throw new InvalidOperationException("Test for resource leaks."); } } } } The output of this program is: Some resource allocated here. Resource used here. Unhandled Exception: System.InvalidOperationException: Test for resource leaks. at RAII.Program.Main(String[] args) in c:\Dev\RAII\RAII\Program.cs:line 40 Resource deallocated here. Code without fear! --Don

  Read the article

• Why is it possible to enumerate a LinqToSql query after calling Dispose() on the DataContext?

  - by DanM

  I'm using the Repository Pattern with some LinqToSql objects. My repository objects all implement IDisposable, and the Dispose() method does only thing--calls Dispose() on the DataContext. Whenever I use a repository, I wrap it in a using person, like this: public IEnumerable<Person> SelectPersons() { using (var repository = _repositorySource.GetNew<Person>(dc => dc.Person)) { return repository.GetAll(); } } This method returns an IEnumerable<Person>, so if my understanding is correct, no querying of the database actually takes place until Enumerable<Person> is traversed (e.g., by converting it to a list or array or by using it in a foreach loop), as in this example: var persons = gateway.SelectPersons(); // Dispose() is fired here var personViewModels = ( from b in persons select new PersonViewModel { Id = b.Id, Name = b.Name, Age = b.Age, OrdersCount = b.Order.Count() }).ToList(); // executes queries In this example, Dispose() gets called immediately after setting persons, which is an IEnumerable<Person>, and that's the only time it gets called. So, a couple questions: How does this work? How can a disposed DataContext still query the database for results when I walk the IEnumerable<Person>? What does Dispose() actually do? I've heard that it is not necessary (e.g., see this question) to dispose of a DataContext, but my impression was that it's not a bad idea. Is there any reason not to dispose of it?

  Read the article

• Is there a list of common object that implement IDisposable for the using statement?

  - by SkippyFire

  I was wondering if there was some sort of cheat sheet for which objects go well with the using statement... SQLConnection, MemoryStream, etc. Taking it one step further, it would be great to even show the other "pieces of the puzzle", like how you should actually call connection.Close() before the closing using statement bracket. Anything like that exist? If not, maybe we should make one.

  Read the article

• ObjectDisposedException when outputting to console

  - by Sarah Vessels

  If I have the following code, I have no runtime or compilation problems: if (ConsoleAppBase.NORMAL_EXIT_CODE == code) { StdOut.WriteLine(msg); } else { StdErr.WriteLine(msg); } However, in trying to make this more concise, I switched to the following code: (ConsoleAppBase.NORMAL_EXIT_CODE == code ? StdOut : StdErr ).WriteLine(msg); When I have this code, I get the following exception at runtime: System.ObjectDisposedException: Cannot write to a closed TextWriter Can you explain why this happens? Can I avoid it and have more concise code like I wanted?

  Read the article

• service.close() vs. service.abort() - WCF example

  - by Larry Watanabe

  In one of the WCF tutorials, I saw the followign sample code: Dim service as ...(a WCF service ) try .. service.close() catch ex as Exception() ... service.abort() end try Is this the correct way to ensure that resources (i.e. connections) are released even under error conditions? Thanks for the answers guys! I upvoted you all.

  Read the article

• Does all SPWeb or SPSite instances get automatically disposed when console app process has ended?

  - by Janis Veinbergs

  We have Best practices on using disposable object in SharePoint. But i`m thinking - can I skip these when using Console Application? That's some code I want to execute once and after that process has finished. Do or don't SPSite and SPWeb's remain opened somwhere? Why i`m asking this? I just don't want to stress when using something like var lists = from web in site.AllWebs.Cast<SPWeb>() where web is meeting workspace && list is task list select list then do some stuff on lists etc. Some serious resource leak there because webs get opened, filtered and NOT closed. So should I worry in console app?

  Read the article

• System::IDisposable woes

  - by shadeMe

  public ref class ScriptEditor : public Form { public: typedef map<UInt32, ScriptEditor^> AlMap; static AlMap AllocationMap; Form^ EditorForm; RichTextBox^ EditorBox; StatusBar^ EditorStatusBar; StatusBarPanel^ StatusBarLineNo; void Destroy() { EditorForm->Close(); } ScriptEditor(unsigned int PosX, unsigned int PosY); }; The above code throws an Error C2039: '{dtor}' : is not a member of 'System::IDisposable'. I'm quite lost after having looked into articles that explain how the CLR manages memory. Any advice on getting rid of it would be appreciated. My first dabble in C+++/CLI isn't going too well.

  Read the article

• Does all SPWeb or SPSite instances automatically disposed when console app process has ended?

  - by Janis Veinbergs

  We have Best practices on using disposable object in SharePoint. But i`m thinking - can I skip these when using Console Application? That's some code I want to execute once and after that process has finished. Do or don't SPSite and SPWeb's remain opened somwhere? Why i`m asking this? I just don't want to stress when using something like var lists = from web in site.AllWebs.Cast<SPWeb>() where web is meeting workspace && list is task list select list then do some stuff on lists etc. Some serious resource leak there because webs get opened, filtered and NOT closed. So should I worry in console app?

  Read the article

• Class Destructor Problem

  - by user279691

  I am making a simple class that contains a StreamWrite class Logger { private StreamWriter sw; private DateTime LastTime; public Logger(string filename) { LastTime = DateTime.Now; sw = new StreamWriter(filename); } public void Write(string s) { sw.WriteLine((DateTime.Now-LastTime).Ticks/10000+":"+ s); LastTime = DateTime.Now; } public void Flush() { sw.Flush(); } ~Logger() { sw.Close();//Raises Exception! } } But when I close this StreamWriter in the destructor, it raises an exception that the StreamWriter was already deleted? Why? And how to make it work such that when the Logger class is deleted, the StreamWriter is closed before deletion? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Deriving from a component and implementing IDisposable properly

  - by PaulH

  I have a Visual Studio 2008 C# .NET 2.0 CF project with an abstract class derived from Component. From that class, I derive several concrete classes (as in my example below). But, when I go to exit my Form, though the Form's Dispose() member is called and components.Dispose() is called, my components are never disposed. Can anybody suggest how I can fix this design? public abstract class SomeDisposableComponentBase : Component { private System.ComponentModel.IContainer components; protected SomeDisposableComponentBase() { Initializecomponent(); } protected SomeDisposableComponentBase(IContainer container) { container.Add(this); Initializecomponent(); } private void InitializeComponent() { components = new System.ComponentModel.Container(); } protected abstract void Foo(); #region IDisposable Members bool disposed_; /// Warning 60 CA1063 : Microsoft.Design : Ensure that 'SomeDisposableComponentBase.Dispose()' is declared as public and sealed.* public void Dispose() { // never called Dispose(true); GC.SuppressFinalize(this); } protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) { // never called if (!disposed_) { if (disposing && (components != null)) { components.Dispose(); } disposed_ = true; } base.Dispose(disposing); } #endregion } public SomeDisposableComponent : SomeDisposableComponentBase { public SomeDisposableComponent() : base() { } public SomeDisposableComponent(IContainer container) : base(container) { } protected override void Foo() { // Do something... } protected override void Dispose(bool disposing) { // never called base.Dispose(disposing); } } public partial class my_form : Form { private SomeDisposableComponentBase d_; public my_form() { InitializeComponent(); if (null == components) components = new System.ComponentModel.Container(); d_ = new SomeDisposableComponent(components); } /// exit button clicked private void Exit_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { this.Close(); } /// from the my_form.designer.cs protected override void Dispose(bool disposing) { if (disposing && (components != null)) { // this function is executed as expected when the form is closed components.Dispose(); } base.Dispose(disposing); } } *I note that FX-Cop is giving me a hint here. But, if I try to declare that function as sealed, I get the error: error CS0238: 'SomeDisposableComponentBase.Dispose()' cannot be sealed because it is not an override Declaring that function an override leads to: 'SomeDisposableComponentBase.Dispose()': cannot override inherited member 'System.ComponentModel.Component.Dispose()' because it is not marked virtual, abstract, or override Thanks, PaulH

  Read the article

• Is closing/disposing an SqlDataReader needed if you are already closing the sqlconnection?

  - by Brian

  I noticed This question, but my question is a bit more specific. Is there any advantage to using using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection(conStr)) { using (SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand()) { // dostuff } } instead of using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection(conStr)) { SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand(); // dostuff } Obviously it does matter run more than one command with the same connection, since closing an SqlDataReader is more efficient than closing and reopening a connection (calling conn.Close();conn.Open(); will also free up the connection). I see many people insist that failure to close the DataReader means leaving open connection resources around, but doesn't that only apply if you don't close the connection?

  Read the article

• Will this class cause memory leaks, and does anything need disposing of? (asp.net vb)

  - by Phil

  Here is the class to export a gridview to an excel sheet: Imports System Imports System.Data Imports System.Configuration Imports System.IO Imports System.Web Imports System.Web.Security Imports System.Web.UI Imports System.Web.UI.WebControls Imports System.Web.UI.WebControls.WebParts Imports System.Web.UI.HtmlControls Namespace ExcelExport Public NotInheritable Class GVExportUtil Private Sub New() End Sub Public Shared Sub Export(ByVal fileName As String, ByVal gv As GridView) HttpContext.Current.Response.Clear() HttpContext.Current.Response.AddHeader("content-disposition", String.Format("attachment; filename={0}", fileName)) HttpContext.Current.Response.ContentType = "application/ms-excel" Dim sw As StringWriter = New StringWriter Dim htw As HtmlTextWriter = New HtmlTextWriter(sw) Dim table As Table = New Table table.GridLines = GridLines.Vertical If (Not (gv.HeaderRow) Is Nothing) Then GVExportUtil.PrepareControlForExport(gv.HeaderRow) table.Rows.Add(gv.HeaderRow) End If For Each row As GridViewRow In gv.Rows GVExportUtil.PrepareControlForExport(row) table.Rows.Add(row) Next If (Not (gv.FooterRow) Is Nothing) Then GVExportUtil.PrepareControlForExport(gv.FooterRow) table.Rows.Add(gv.FooterRow) End If table.RenderControl(htw) HttpContext.Current.Response.Write(sw.ToString) HttpContext.Current.Response.End() End Sub Private Shared Sub PrepareControlForExport(ByVal control As Control) Dim i As Integer = 0 Do While (i < control.Controls.Count) Dim current As Control = control.Controls(i) If (TypeOf current Is LinkButton) Then control.Controls.Remove(current) control.Controls.AddAt(i, New LiteralControl(CType(current, LinkButton).Text)) ElseIf (TypeOf current Is ImageButton) Then control.Controls.Remove(current) control.Controls.AddAt(i, New LiteralControl(CType(current, ImageButton).AlternateText)) ElseIf (TypeOf current Is HyperLink) Then control.Controls.Remove(current) control.Controls.AddAt(i, New LiteralControl(CType(current, HyperLink).Text)) ElseIf (TypeOf current Is DropDownList) Then control.Controls.Remove(current) control.Controls.AddAt(i, New LiteralControl(CType(current, DropDownList).SelectedItem.Text)) ElseIf (TypeOf current Is CheckBox) Then control.Controls.Remove(current) control.Controls.AddAt(i, New LiteralControl(CType(current, CheckBox).Checked)) End If If current.HasControls Then GVExportUtil.PrepareControlForExport(current) End If i = (i + 1) Loop End Sub End Class End Namespace Will this class cause memory leaks? And does anything here need to be disposed of? The code is working but I am getting the app pool falling over frequently when it is in use. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Class design question (Disposable and singleton behavior)

  - by user137348

  The Repository class has singleton behavior and the _db implements the disposable pattern. As excepted the _db object gets disposed after the first call and because of the singleton behavior any other call of _db will crash. [ServiceBehavior(InstanceContextMode=InstanceContextMode.Single)] public class Repository : IRepository { private readonly DataBase _db; public Repository(DataBase db) { _db = db; } public int GetCount() { using(_db) { return _db.Menus.Count(); } } public Item GetItem(int id) { using(_db) { return _db.Menus.FirstOrDefault(x=>x.Id == id); } } } My question is, is there any way to design this class to work properly without removing the singleton behavior? The Repositoryclass will be serving big amount of requests.

  Read the article

• WPF Prism deactivate ?

  - by 2Fast4YouBR

  Hi all, I have an problem and would like to know if it is common problem or jsut with me. I am using Wpf with Prism and Unity, all with the pattern MvvM. I am loading a viewModel that has a reference to a dropdown with few items, my idea is that each time that the user click in some place to open the view that has this dropdown is that the dropdown will be shown with diferent values. The problem is that I see is that after I show the view for the first time and after the first DEACTIVATE, when I try to load it again looks like it is already in the memory (was not deactivated/disposed), so as is already in memory, it not call the constructor again of the modelView and the dropdown is shown with tha same old values. public BranchSelectionViewModel(IUnityContainer unityContainer) { this.unityContainer = unityContainer; User user = this.unityContainer.Resolve<User>(); this.branches = new ObservableCollection<Department>(user.Departments .Where(department => department.DepartmentId != user.SelectedDepartment.DepartmentId)); }

  Read the article

• Why does ICEfaces send dispose-window request on page unload when using view-scoped bean?

  - by woflrevo

  in our application ICEfaces always sends a dispose-window request just before navigating to another JSF Page. as much as i understand this should not happen when having org.icefaces.lazyWindowScope set to true and there is no window-scoped bean involved in current request. but it happens on each link and makes our UI less responsive. but we don't have any window-scoped bean in our application. is that a bug in icefaces that the dispose request is sent when using view-scoped beans? Is it possible to disable? ViewScope is defined in JSF not in ICEfaces, it should work without this dispose request i guess... @ManagedBean(name="viewScopeBean") @ViewScoped public class ViewScopeBean { public void doSomething(){ // } } And here the example jsf: <ice:form> <ice:commandButton value="doSomething" action="#{viewScopeBean.doSomething}"/> <h:link outcome="index" value="Link to same page"/> </ice:form> To reproduce do the following using the code above: open firebug's net tab and activate persist option click doSomething-Button click "link to same page" = dispose-window will be send before navigation Dispose Request Parameters: ice.submit.type=ice.dispose.window ice.window=4guthcbue javax.faces.ViewState=-8138151632882151449%3A-6709064564386098402 Environment: ICEfaces-EE 2.0.0.GA ICEpush-EE 2.0.0.GA Mojarra 2.1.1 JRockit 1.6.0_22 WebLogic Server 10.3.4.0 ICEfaces Configuration: org.icefaces.render.auto: true [default] org.icefaces.autoid: true [default] org.icefaces.aria.enabled: true [default] org.icefaces.blockUIOnSubmit: false [default] org.icefaces.compressDOM: false [default] org.icefaces.compressResources: true [default] org.icefaces.connectionLostRedirectURI: /pages/main.jsf org.icefaces.deltaSubmit: false [default] org.icefaces.lazyPush: true [default] org.icefaces.sessionExpiredRedirectURI: /pages/main.jsf org.icefaces.standardFormSerialization: false [default] org.icefaces.strictSessionTimeout: false [default] org.icefaces.windowScopeExpiration = 1000 [default] org.icefaces.mandatoryResourceConfiguration: null [default] org.icefaces.uniqueResourceURLs: true [default] org.icefaces.lazyWindowScope: true [default] org.icefaces.disableDefaultErrorPopups: false [default]

  Read the article

• Can I dispose a DataTable and still use its data later?

  - by Eduardo León

  Noob ADO.NET question: Can I do the following? Retrieve a DataTable somehow. Dispose it. Still use its data. (But not send it back to the database, or request the database to update it.) I have the following function, which is indirectly called by every WebMethod in a Web Service of mine: public static DataTable GetDataTable(string cmdText, SqlParameter[] parameters) { // Read the connection string from the web.config file. Configuration configuration = WebConfigurationManager.OpenWebConfiguration("/WSProveedores"); ConnectionStringSettings connectionString = configuration.ConnectionStrings.ConnectionStrings["..."]; SqlConnection connection = null; SqlCommand command = null; SqlParameterCollection parameterCollection = null; SqlDataAdapter dataAdapter = null; DataTable dataTable = null; try { // Open a connection to the database. connection = new SqlConnection(connectionString.ConnectionString); connection.Open(); // Specify the stored procedure call and its parameters. command = new SqlCommand(cmdText, connection); command.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure; parameterCollection = command.Parameters; foreach (SqlParameter parameter in parameters) parameterCollection.Add(parameter); // Execute the stored procedure and retrieve the results in a table. dataAdapter = new SqlDataAdapter(command); dataTable = new DataTable(); dataAdapter.Fill(dataTable); } finally { if (connection != null) { if (command != null) { if (dataAdapter != null) { // Here the DataTable gets disposed. if (dataTable != null) dataTable.Dispose(); dataAdapter.Dispose(); } parameterCollection.Clear(); command.Dispose(); } if (connection.State != ConnectionState.Closed) connection.Close(); connection.Dispose(); } } // However, I still return the DataTable // as if nothing had happened. return dataTable; }

  Read the article

• WCF: Is it safe to override the Client's Dispose method using a partial class?

  - by pdiddy

  I'd like to override the Dispose method of generated proxy (ClientBase) because of the fact that disposing of a proxy calls Close and can throw an exception when the channel is faulted. The only way I came up was to create a partial class to my generated proxy, make it inherit from IDisposable: public partial class MyServiceProxy : IDisposable { #region IDisposable Members public void Dispose() { if (State != System.ServiceModel.CommunicationState.Faulted) Close(); else Abort(); } #endregion } I did some test and my Dispose method is indeed called. Do you see any issue with this strategy? Also, I don't like the fact that I'll have to create this partial class for every generated proxy. It be nice if I was able to make my proxy inherit from a base class...

  Read the article

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