Settings the DataContext in XAML and the ObjectDataProvider

I was updating a Tips & Tricks post on setting the DataContext via XAML and realised the post was getting way too large for a Tips & Tricks, so here’s the content in its own post.

So to set the DataContext in XAML we can do the following

<Window.DataContext>
   <Thermometer:ConversionViewModel />
</Window.DataContext>

This is simple enough, but there are various other ways to do this in XAML

ObjectDataProvider

The ObjectDataProvider allows us to create an object for use as a binding source within XAML. Unlike the Datacontext shown above, we declare the XAML for the ObjectDataProvider within the Window.Resources section as per

<Window.Resources>
   <ObjectDataProvider ObjectType="{x:Type Thermometer:ConversionViewModel}" x:Key="data">
      <ObjectDataProvider.ConstructorParameters>
         <system:Double>30</system:Double>
      </ObjectDataProvider.ConstructorParameters>
   </ObjectDataProvider>
</Window.Resources>

In the example above you’ll notice we can supply constructor parameters also.

We give the object a key for use in our bindings where we could just do something like

<Grid DataContext="{StaticResource data}">
...
</Grid>

or

<TextBlock Text={Binding Source={StaticResource data}, Path=Name}" />

The ObjectDataProvider also allows us to bind to a Method return value. So for example, what if we have the ObjectDataProvider similar to the one previously declared and we have a method named GetAge which takes a parameter (the name of the person who’s age we want returned). Like the previous example we can declare our ObjectDataProvider in the Resources section and it might look like this

<ObjectDataProvider ObjectInstance="{StaticResource data}" MethodName="GetAge" x:Key="age">
   <ObjectDataProvider.MethodParameters>
      <system:String>Bob</system:String>
   </ObjectDataProvider.MethodParameters>
</ObjectDataProvider>

Now we can bind to this data in the following way

<Label Content="{Binding Source={StaticResource age}}" />

Note: Just remember that the binding source is one way. So if you were to assign it to a two way by default control such as a TextBox, you’d get an error requiring you to set the binding to one way (not much use really on a text box).

But it would be much cooler if you could bind to the method and yet interact with the parameters at runtime, i.e. the user enters a person’s name (in our example) and the label updates to show the age of that person.

This can be achieved by creating a binding to the ObjectDataProvider object itself. By default we’ve seen that the interaction with the binding source allows us to pass straight through to the actual data the binding source contains, i.e. we do not appear to be using an ObjectDataProvider to bind to but instead the data source we assigned to it. If we could bind somehow to the ObjectDataProvider itself we could change the arguments passed to the method. This is how we do this…

<TextBox>
   <TextBox.Text>
      <Binding Source="{StaticResource age}" Path="MethodParameters[0]" BindsDirectlyToSource="true" />
   </TextBox.Text>
</TextBox>

As you can see above, we bind to the source as we’ve done previously but we now have a Path that points to the MethodParameters list and we’ve set the BindsDirectlyToSource to true. This tells the binding to evaluate the path on DataSourceProvider object (the ObjectDataProvider) as opposed to our data which is wrapped within the ObjectDataProvider.

Another thing to note about the code above, is that this works fine if the method parameter is a string (as in our example), but if it’s not then you’ll need to convert the type within the TextBox.Text binding source to the type expected by the method or you’ll simply find the method doesn’t get called.

For example

<TextBox.Text>
   <Binding Source="{StaticResource name}" 
                 Path="MethodParameters[0]" BindsDirectlyToSource="true" 
                 Converter="{MyConverters:ConvertTypeConverter To={x:Type system:Int32}}"/>
</TextBox.Text>

And finally…
Just to conclude this tip by also stating that you can also declare your view model in XAML as a resource as in the following

<Window.Resources>
   <Thermometer:ConversionViewModel InitialValue="30" x:Key="data" />
</Window.Resources>

The above shows how we can set properties on the view model as well.

Mutex – Running a single instance of an application

Occasionally you might want to create an application that can only have a single instance running on a machine at a time. For example, maybe you’ve a tray icon application or maybe an application that caches data for other applications to use etc.

We can achieve this by using a Mutex. A Mutex is very much like a Monitor/lock but can exist across multiple processes.

class Program
{
   static void Main(string[] args)
   {
      using(Mutex mutex = new Mutex(false, "some_unique_application_key"))
      {
         if(!mutex.WaitOne(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(3), false))
         {
            // another instance of the application must be running so exit
            return;
         }
         // Put code to run the application here
      }
   }
}

So in the above code we create a mutex with a unique key (“some_unique_application_key”). It’s best to use something like a URL and application name, so maybe “putridparrot.com\MyApp” as an example. The mutex is held onto for the life of the application for obvious reasons.

Next we try to WaitOne, we need a timeout on this otherwise we’ll just block at this point until the other instance closes down (or more specifically the Mutex on the other instance is released). So choose a time span of your choice. If the timeout occurs then false is returned from WaitOne and we can take it that another instance of the application is running, so we exit this instance of the application.

On the other hand if (within the timeout) WaitOne returns true then no other instance of the application (well more specifically the named Mutex) exists and we can go ahead and do whatever we need to run our application.

Semaphore & SemaphoreSlim

Basically a Semaphore allows us to set the initial count and the maximum number of threads than can enter a critical section.

The standard analogy of how a Semaphore works is the nightclub and bouncer analogy. So a nightclub has a capacity of X and the bouncer stops any clubbers entering once the nightclub reaches it’s capacity. Those clubbers can only enter when somebody leaves the nightclub.

In the case of a Semaphore we use WaitOne (or Wait on SemaphoreSlim) to act as the “bouncer” to the critical section and Release to inform the “bouncer” that a thread has left the critical section. For example

private readonly Semaphore semaphore = new Semaphore(3, 3);

private void MyCriticalSection(object o)
{
    sempahore.WaitOne();
    // do something
    semaphore.Release();
}

In the code above, say our calling method creates 20 threads all running the MyCriticalSection code, i.e.

for (int i = 0; i < 20; i++)
{
   Thread thread = new Thread(Run);
   thread.Start();
}

What happens is that the first three threads to arrive at semaphore.WaitOne will be allowed access to the code between the WaitOne and Release. All other threads block until one or more threads calls release. Thus ensuring that at any one time a maximum of (in this case) 3 threads can have access to the critical section.

Okay but the Semaphore allows an initial count (the first argument) so what’s that about ?

So let’s assume instead we have an initial count of 0, what happens then ?

private readonly Semaphore semaphore = new Semaphore(0, 3);

The above code still says we have a maximum of 3 threads allowed in our critical section, but it’s basically reserved 3 threads (maximum threads – initial count = reserved). In essence this is like saying the calling thread called WaitOne three times. The point being that when we fire off our 20 threads none will gain access to the critical section as all slots are reserved. So we would need to Release some slots before the blocked threads would be allowed into the critical section.

Obviously this is useful if we wanted to start a bunch of threads but we weren’t ready for the critical section to be entered yet.

However we can also set the initial count to another number, so let’s say we set it to 1 and maximum is still 3, now we have a capacity of 3 threads for our critical section but currently only one is allowed to enter the section until the reserved slots are released.

Note: It’s important to be sure that you only release the same number of times that you WaitOne or in the case of reserved slots you can only release up to the number of reserved slots.

To put it more simply, think reference counting. If you WaitOne you must call Release once and only once for each WaitOne. In the case of where we reserved 3 slots you can call Release(3) (or release less than 3) but you cannot release 4 as this would cause a SemaphoreFullException.

Important: Unlike a Mutex or Monitor/lock a Semaphore does not have thread affinity, in other words we can call Release from any thread, not just the thread which called WaitOne.

SemaphoreSlim

SemaphoreSlim, as the name suggests in a lightweight implementation of a Semaphore. The first thing to notice is that it uses Wait instead of WaitOne. The real purpose of the SemaphoreSlim is to supply a faster Semaphore (typically a Semaphore might take 1 ms per WaitOne and per Release, the SemaphoreSlim takes a quarter of this time, source ).

See also

Semaphore and SemaphoreSlim
Overview of Synchronization Primitives

and the brilliant Threading in C#

Puppet Task – TaskCompletionSource

Occasionally we will either want to wrap some code in a Task to allow us to use async await and maybe creating an actual Task is not required. It could be legacy code, for example maybe we’re running a threadpool thread and want to make this appear as a async await capable method or maybe we are mocking a method in our unit tests.

In such cases we can use the TaskCompletionSource.

Let’s look at a slightly convoluted example. We have a third party (or binary only) library with a ExternalMethod class and a method called CalculateMeanAsync which uses the threadpool to execute some process and when the process is completed it calls the supplied callback Action passing a double value as a result. So it’s method signature might look like

public static void CalculateMeanValueAsync(Action<double> callback)

Now we want to use this method in a more async await style i.e. we’d like to call the method like this

double d = await CalculateMeanValueAsync();

We want to basically create a task to handle this but we want to manually control it from outside of the external method. We can thus use the TaskCompletedSource as a puppet task, writing something like the code below to wrap the external method call in an async await compatible piece of code.

public Task<double> CalculateMeanValueAsync()
{
   var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<double>();

   ExternalMethod.CalculateMeanValueAsync(result => 
   {
      tcs.SetResult(result);
   });

   return tcs.Task;
}

What happens here is we create a TaskCompletionSource, and return a Task from it (which obviously may or may not return prior to the ExternalMethod.CalculateMeanValueAsync completion. Our calling code awaits our new CalculateMeanValueAsync method and when the callback Action is called we set the result using tcs.SetResult. This will now cause our TaskCompletionSource task to complete allows our code to continue to any code after the await in the calling method.

So we’ve essentially made a method appear as a Task style async method but controlling the flow via the TaskCompletionSource.

Another example might be in unit testing. When mocking an interface which returns a Task we could create a TaskCompletionSource and create a setup that returns it’s Task property, then set the mock result on the TaskCompletionSource. An example of such a test is listed below:

[Fact]
public async Task CalculateMean_ExpectCallToIStatisticCalculator_ResultShouldBeSuppliedByMock()
{
   TaskCompletionSource<double> tc = new TaskCompletionSource<double>();

   var mock = new Mock<IStatisticsCalculator>();
   mock.Setup(s => s.CalculateMeanAsync()).Returns(tc.Task);

   tc.SetResult(123.45);

   Calculator c = new Calculator(mock.Object);
   double mean = await c.CalculateMeanAsync();
   Assert.Equal(123.45, mean);

   mock.Verify();
}

So in this example we have a Calculator class which takes an IStatisticsCalculator (maybe it allows us to swap in and out different code for the calculations – I didn’t say it was a perfect example). Now in our test we want to create a mock (I’m using xUnit and Moq for this). We expect the Calculator to call the mock code and return the result from it.

As you can see the mock sets up the Task and then we set the result on the TaskCompletionSource to emulate a completion of the task.

Note: In this example you must return Task on your async test method or you may find the test passing even when it clearly shouldn’t

void return methods in WCF (IsOneWay)

Don’t forget, if you’re implementing a fire and forget style method call in WCF, to mark it as one way.

In situations where you do not need or want to return a value from the server or handle exceptions from the client. You must mark the method’s operation contract as IsOneWay=true.

For example (if this is the service contract)

[ServiceContract]
public interface IProjectManager
{
   [OperationContract(IsOneWay=true)]
   void Run();
}

Without the IsOneWay=true the method will get called by the client but will block and may eventually timeout.

Basically with a one way operation the client calls the service and the service may queue the call to be dispatched one at a time. If the number of queued calls exceeds the queue’s capacity the client will block. In the case of a one way call the message is queued but the client unblocked. It is not an async call but may appear that way.

By default IsOneWay is false, hence the need to add the option to the attribute explicitly.

WPF Tips & Tricks

This idea of the tips & tricks is just as a scratch pad for code snippets etc. relating to the subject that don’t warrant a whole post to themselves. Here’s a few WPF tips & tricks.

StringFormat

I seem to always forget this, basically a simple way to apply string formatting to a TextBox (for example) is to use StringFormat

<TextBox Text="{Binding Fahrenheit, StringFormat={}{0:#.##}}" />

The above formats the TextBox string to 2 dp. Fahrenheit in this instance being a float.

Another example with DateTime formatting

<TextBlock Text="{Binding LastUpdateDateTime, StringFormat={}{0:HH:mm:ss dd/MM/yyyy}}" />

Setting the DataContext in XAML

Another one I seem to forget a lot. Admittedly I only tend to use it for simple apps. but still.

<Window.DataContext>
   <Thermometer:ConversionViewModel />
</Window.DataContext>

So we can set the data context on the main window easily enough using this method but there’s also a couple of other ways to create a view model in XAML…

See Settings the DataContext in XAML and the ObjectDataProvider

Order of XAML attributes

A little gotcha to watch out for. Take something like a ComboBox which has the SelectedValue and ItemsSource attributes.

Beware that if SelectedValue appears before ItemsSource you may well find the SelectedValue not set when the binding first takes place. Switch the two around so ItemSource appears first and this should fix the problem.

Detecting whether you’re in design mode

If you need to check whether your control (or general UI) is currently being displayed in design mode, i.e. maybe to not waste time displaying animation or the likes, use

if(!!DesignerProperties.GetIsInDesignMode(this))
{
   // not in design mode
}

Beware d:DesignWidth & d:DesignedHeight as opposed to Height and Width

This is a stupid tip and everyone should know but it’s funny how easy it is to miss this.

I was designing a simple little UI in WPF using both XAML code and the WPF Designer. I made a change to the Width and Height of the control. Unbeknown to me the actual control’s Width and Height were set, not the DesignWidth & DesignHeight. Hence when I placed the control onto another control I couldn’t understand initially why the control was not expanded correctly, when I resized the app.

So beware the WPF designer switching to setting your actual Width and Height as opposed to the d:DesignWidth and d:DesignHeight as it can lead to some head scratching when views are not resizing as expected.

Ix/Interactive Extensions

I’m a bit late to the party with this one – Ix or Interactive Extensions.

Available on NuGet via the Ix-Main package. This will give us the System.Interactive assembly.

Ix are basically a bunch of extension methods for IEnumerable and the
EnumerableEx class. I’m sure many of us have written IEnumerable extensions to supply a ForEach extension method or the likes. Well Ix gives us that and more.

In this post I will not be documenting each overload but will try to give an idea of what the methods might be used for and how to use them. Checking which overload is suitable is down to the reader.

Note: some of the examples may be less than useful, I will attempt to update with better examples as/when I come up with them.

Buffer

Basically takes an IEnumerable and creates an IEnumerable of IList of type T of the given buffer size.

IEnumerable<int> items = new int[] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76, 45, 32, 1, 6, 3, 89, 100 };
IEnumerable<IList<int>> lists = items.Buffer(3);

The above would result in an IEnumerable with 4 ILists of type T each containing up to 3 items each. An overload of this method exists which allows you to skip a number of elements at the start of each buffer.

Case

Case is a static method on EnumerableEx and allows us to pass in an argument to compare against and an IDictionary of keys – which will be used to match with the argument passed into the Case method and it will return an IEnumerable relating to the values which appear in the dictionary against the given key. So for example

IDictionary<int, IEnumerable<string>> d = new Dictionary<int, IEnumerable<string>>
{
   {5, new[] {"Five"}},
   {4, new[] {"Four"}},
   {1, new[] {"One"}},
   {2, new[] {"Two"}},
   {3, new[] {"Three"}},
};

var matches = EnumerableEx.Case(() => 4, d);

In the above, matches will contain the IEnumerable of the values stored in the dictionary against the key 4, in other words the IEnumerable containing the string “Four”.

An overload of this method allows you to supply an IEnumerable to act as the default values should a match against the selector not be found.

Create

Create is a static method on the EnumerableEx class which allows us to create an IEnumerable from a IEnumerator (or via an overload from an IYielder).

Let’s assume we have a method that returns an IEnumerator of integers, here’s a mock up of such a method

private static IEnumerator<int> Factory()
{
   yield return 1;
   yield return 2;
   yield return 3;
   yield return 4;
}

Now using Ix we can create an IEnumerable of integers using

var items = EnumerableEx.Create(Factory);

Defer

As the name suggests Defer will defer the creation of an enumerable sequence until a call to GetEnumerator, so for example

var items = EnumerableEx.Defer(() => new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2 });

the code above will not call the enumerable factory method (in this case the anonymous method creating an array of integers) until the GetEnumerator is called.

Catch

Creates an IEnumerable sequence based on the source, but if the source has an exception will switch to the second IEnumerable.

A somewhat convoluted sample below

IEnumerable<int> GetNegatives()
{ 
   int[] items = new int[] { -1, -2, 0, -3 };
   for (int i = 0; i < items.Length; i++)
   {
      if (items[i] >= 0)
         throw new Exception();

      yield return items[i];
   }
}

IEnumerable<int> items = new int[] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76, 45, 32, 1, 6, 3, 89, 100 };
IEnumerable<int> e = GetNegatives().Catch(items);

The above will create an IEnumerable e that contains -1, -2 and then the values from the items IEnumerable.

There are several overloads of the Catch method to check out.

Distinct

Returns an IEnumerable of the distinct values in a sequence

IEnumerable<int> items = new int[] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76, 45, 32, 1, 6, 3, 89, 100 };
IEnumerable<int> distinct = items.Distinct();

The above will result in a sequence 3, 5, 6, 2, 76, 45, 32, 1, 89, 100 removing the duplicates.

DistinctUntilChanged

Returns consecutive distinct values

IEnumerable<int> items = new int[] { 3, 3, 3, 5, 5, 2, 76, 76, 100 };
IEnumerable<int> distinct = items.DistinctUntilChanged();

The above will return an sequence 3, 5, 2, 76, 100

Do

Several overloads of the Do method exist, we’ll just take a look at the one which takes an Action. Do will simply invoke some action on each item within the IEnumerable, so for example

IEnumerable<int> items = new int[] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
items.Do(Console.WriteLine);

the above code will simply call WriteLine on each integer within the items IEnumerable. However, this is lazy and hence we actually need to do something with the items returns enumerable.

DoWhile

The DoWhile method iterates over an IEnumerable whilst the supplied function is true, so for example

var items = new int[] { 3, 5, 6, 2 };

int i = 0;
var results = items.DoWhile(() => i++ < 2);
int len = results.Count();

If we run this code the len variable will be 12 as the DoWhile looped through the IEnumerable 3 times and the items array contained four items. So basically if we output to the console each item returned by results will see the array items output three times.

Expand

Expand, basically loops through the supplied IEnumerable (possibly infinitely if you do not use a Take or similar method to stop it). In essence is applies a selector function each time through the enumerable changing the values.

So imagine we have an array of values 1, 2 and 0 and apply Expand to this as follows

var items = new [] { 1, 2, 0 };
var results = items.Expand(i => new[] {i + 1}).Take(9);

what happens here is the output (if we ran results.ForEach(Console.WriteLine)) will output 1, 2, 0 (the values from items then 2, 3, 1 and finally 3, 4, 2. As you see each time we iterate through we add 1 to each element.

Finally

Finally can be used on a sequence so that an action may be invoked upon the termination or disposal, so for example the following will output the sequence to the console then output “Completed”

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };

items.Finally(() => Console.WriteLine("Completed")).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

For

The For method takes a source enumerable and applies a supplied enumerable to it, so a simple example might be

IEnumerable<int> items = new int[] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
EnumerableEx.For(items, i => new []{i + 1, i + 2});

In this case each item in the items enumerable will have the new []{i + 1, i + 2} applied to it, thus output for this would be

4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 3, 4, 77, 78

the first item 3 in the source enumerable is sent to the For method and we get back a transformed value as two values 3 + 1 and then 3 + 2 and so on.

ForEach

ForEach will invoke an action on each item within an IEnumerable, so a simple example might be to just write a more compact foreach to write output to the console, i.e.

IEnumerable<int> items = new int[] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
items.ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

Generate

As the name suggests, Generate can be used to generate a sequence in a similar way to a for loop might be used, here’s an example which creates an IEnumerable with the range [10, 20]

EnumerableEx.Generate(10, i => i <= 20, i => i + 1, i => i)

The first argument is the starting value, then we have the condition to stop the generator, next we have the state update function, in this case we’re incrementing the state by 1, finally we have the result function, in this case we’re just using the supplied state value.

Hide

To quote the documentation “Returns Enumerable sequence with the same behavior as the original, but hiding the source identity”.

I’m not wholly sure of the use cases for this, but basically if we have the following

List<int> items = new List<int> { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };

if we used items.AsEnumerable() the type returned would still be a List however using

var result = items.Hide();

result will be a funky EnumerableEx type hiding the underlying implementation.

If

The If method is self-explanatory, it allows us to return an IEnumerable if a condition is met or it will return an empty sequence or the overload shown below acts as an if..else returning the alternate sequence

EnumerableEx.If(() => someCondition, new[] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 }, new [] {6, 7});

So it’s probably obvious that if the someCondition is true the first array is returned else the second array is returned.

IgnoreElements

A slightly odd one, which probably is more useful when used in combination with other methods. IgnoreElements returns a source sequence without its elements

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
var result = items.IgnoreElements();

result will be an empty sequence.

IsEmpty

As the name suggests, checks if the sequence is empty or not, obviously the following is not empty

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
var result = items.IsEmpty();

whereas the following will be empty

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
var result = items.IgnoreElements().IsEmpty();

Max

Returns the maximum value in the sequence

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
var result = items.Max();

this will result in the result being 76.

MaxBy

In essence MaxBy returns a sequence of values less than the supplied comparer, for example

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 50, 6, 2, 76 };
items.MaxBy(i => i < 50).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

this will create a sequence with values less than 50 and in this case write them to the console, thus outputting the values 3, 6 and 2.

Memoize

Memoize creates a buffer over the source sequence to ensure that if we were to iterate over the items multiple times we would not call the source multiple times. Obviously this would be useful if we’ve got the data from some file system or remote source to stop us retrieving the data multiple times, in use we have

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
var result = items.Memoize();

Min

Returns the minimum value in the sequence

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
var result = items.Max();

this will result in the result being 2.

MinBy

In essence MinBy returns a sequence of values greater than the supplied comparer, for example

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 50, 6, 2, 76 };
items.MinBy(i => i < 50).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

this will create a sequence with values greater or equal to 50 and in this case write them to the console, thus outputting the values 50 and 76.

OnErrorResumeNext

Concatenates the sequence with a second sequence regardless of whether an error occurred, used in situation where you might be getting data from a source that could fail, the example below just shows the syntax really as this wouldn’t need to use OnErrorResumeNext

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 50, 6, 2, 76 };
var result = items.OnErrorResumeNext(new[] {9, 10});

result would contain the items sequence followed by the sequence { 9, 10 }.

Publish

To quote the documentation, “creates a buffer with a view over the source sequence, causing each enumerator to obtain access to the remainder of the sequence from the current index in the buffer”.

This allows the sequence to be shared via the buffer, in syntax terms this looks like

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 50, 6, 2, 76 };
var buffer = items.Publish();

There is an overloaded method which allows you to supply a selector.

Repeat

Allows us to iterate through a sequence infinitely or with the overload, n times

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };

// iterate over three times
items.Repeat(3).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

// iterate infinitely
items.Repeat().ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

Retry

This method allows us to retry enumerating a sequence whilst an error occurs or via the overload we can specify the maximum number of retries

items.Retry(2);

Return

The Return method returns a single element as a sequence, for example

EnumerableEx.Return(1);

this creates an IEnumerable of integers with the single value 1 in it.

Scan

Scan generates a sequence using an accumulator, so for example

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
items.Scan((i, j) => i + j).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

will pass 3 (i) and 5 (j) into the accumulator method the result will be 8 this will then be pass into the accumulator as i followed by 6 (j) and so on.

SelectMany

Several overloads exist, the one shown here simply projects each element of the sequence with a given sequence. For example the following simply projects the array { 5, 6 } over the original sequence

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 50, 6, 2, 76 };
items.SelectMany(new [] { 5, 6 }).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

This will output { 5, 6 } the number of times matching the number of elements in the items sequence, i.e. 5 times.

Share

A couple of overloads. This method creates a buffer with a shared view over the sequence so mutiple enumerators can be used to fetch the next element from the sequence, this example is a little convoluted

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 20, 10, 60, 30 };
items.Share(x => x.Zip(x, (a, b) => a - b)).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

The same sequence is used on Zip and passed into Zip hence we’re zipping the sequence with itself, the result selector simply subtracts one value from the other. When output to the console this will write a sequence 10, 30 because the first item (20) has the second item (10) subtracted from it, as then the next item (60) has the final item (30) subtracted.

SkipLast

Allows us to skip/bypass n elements from the end of in the sequence, thus

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
items.SkipLast(2).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

lists values 3, 5, 6 but not the last 2 items.

StartWith

StartWith starts the sequence with the newly supplied enumerable, for example

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
items.StartWith(new []{9, 10}).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

will output the sequence 9, 10 then follow with the items sequence.

TakeLast

In essence the opposite of SkipLast, TakeLast results in a sequence on the last n items, such as

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };
items.TakeLast(2).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

which outputs 2 and 76.

Throw

With the Throw method we can create a sequence which throws an exception when we try to enumerate it, for example

EnumerableEx.Throw<int>(new NullReferenceException()).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

will throw the NullReferenceException when ForEach attempts to enumerate the sequence.

Using

Using creates a sequence which has a resource who’s lifetime is determined by the sequence usage. The idea being the resource is created via the Using method’s first argument then passed to the second argument (in all likelihood to be used in some way) before an IEnumerable is returned. The key thing to note is the resource is not created until we use the returned IEnumerable, for example

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6 };
IEnumerable<int> results = EnumerableEx.Using(() => new SomeDisposable(), resource => items);
results.ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

Assuming SomeDisposable implements IDisposable, when we call GetEnumerator the SomeDisposable is created and passed to the second argument – this rather simplistic example does nothing with the resource but hopefully you get the idea. We then return the IEnumerable and when the GetEnumerator completes the resources Dispose method is called.

While

Loops through the sequence whilst a condition is true, so for example

IEnumerable<int> items = new [] { 3, 5, 6, 2, 76 };

int i = 0;
EnumerableEx.While(() => i++ < 3, items).ForEach(Console.WriteLine);

will output the items sequence three times.

Enumerations in WCF

Like other data types designed to go over the WCF wire (as it were) we need to mark the enum with a DataContractAttribute. Unlike classes, which use the DataMemberAttribute for any published methods we use the EnumMemberAttribute. For example

[DataContract]
public enum Status
{
   [EnumMember]
   None,
   [EnumMember]
   Running,
   [EnumMember]
   Failed,
   [EnumMember]
   Succeeded
}

Don’t forget to add a FlagsAttribute if you are requiring the enum to work as flags otherwise you’ll get an error from WCF when combining your flags, as the value will be unexpected.

Derived and base classes in WCF

This is a short post on something that caught me out, primarily due to the awful client side error message.

The server did not provide a meaningful reply; this might be caused by a contract mismatch, a premature session shutdown or an internal server error.

I was implementing a WCF service to allow my client to get historic data from the service. But as the History object might become large I also wanted a HistorySummary object with the bare minimum data. So for example my client UI would list the history summary data and only when the user clicked on the summary would the full data get loaded.

So I implemented my HistorySummary (abridged version below)

[DataContract]
public class HistorySummary
{
   [DataMember]
   public string Name { get; set; }
   // ... other properties
}

From this I derived my History object (also abridged)

[DataContract]
public class History : HistorySummary
{
   [DataMember]
   public string[] Reports { get; set; }
   // ... other properties
}

If you’re experienced in WCF you’ll immediately spot the problem straight away.

I built the server and ran it, no problems. I regenerated the proxies and ran the client and bang ! I get the less than helpful error message shown above.

KnownTypes was the problem. Easy to forget. The base class, HistorySummary should have looked like this

[DataContract]
[KnownType(typeof(History))]
public class HistorySummary
{
   [DataMember]
   public string Name { get; set; }
   // ... other properties
}

The Parallels

The Parallel static class gives us a few nice helper methods to carry out For, ForEach and Invoke methods in a parallel way. In reality we should say a potentially parallel way as there’s no guarantee they will be executed in separate tasks.

Parallel.ForEach

The ForEach method has several overloads, but basically this will loop through an IEnumerable passing each value into an Action. For example

int[] values = new[] { 3, 5, 1, 45, 12, 6, 49 };
Parallel.ForEach(values, Console.WriteLine);

The order in which the Console.WriteLine method is passed values is non-deterministic. In other words there’s no guarantee that 1 will be processed before 45 and so on. A key thing to remember is that all values will be processed before the Parallel.ForEach call returns control to the calling code. In other word a Wait stops the calling code to continue until all items in the enumerable object passed to the ForEach method have been processed.

This means if you run Parallel.ForEach from a UI thread then it will block even though each item placed into the ForEach list is potentially run in parallel. So you need to do something like

Task.Factory.StartNew(() => Parallel.ForEach(values, SomeAction));

Obviously if anything within the action needs to update the UI thread you’ll need to marshal it onto the UI thread.

Parallel.For

Along with the ForEach we also have the For loop. Which allows us to loop from a (inclusive) to b (exclusive) indices calling the supplied Action with the index. For example

int[] values = new[] { 3, 5, 1, 45, 12, 6, 49 };
Parallel.For(0, 2, i => Console.WriteLine(values[i]));

In this instance only “values” 3 and 5 will be passed to the action as we’re starting at (and including) index 0 and stopping before index 2 (as it’s exclusive). The same issues/traits exist for the For loop in that it is blocking etc.

Invoke

Finally we have Invoke which takes an array of Actions and calls them in a potentially parallel manner. Thus if we had several actions that we want to call potentially in parallel we can pass them to the Invoke method to be executed. For example

Parallel.Invoke(() => Console.WriteLine(3), 
                () => Console.WriteLine(4), 
                () => Console.WriteLine(5));

As per For and ForEach this method will potentially execute the actions in parallel but will block the calling thread.

Exceptions

If exceptions occur within the loops or invoke the Parallel library will throw an AggregationException which will contain one or more InnerExceptions.

ParallelLoopState

We can also pass a ParallelLoopState object into either the ForEach or For loops which allows us to Break or Stop a parallel loop as well as allowing us to find out whether a loop has exceptioned or is stopped etc.

ParallelOptions

Each of the For, ForEach and Invoke method have an overload which takes ParallelOptions. This enables us to set the maximum degree of parallelism, the task scheduler and the cancellation token.

The maximum degree of parallelism allows us to limit the possible number of threads uses in a Parallel method.

The cancellation token allows us a way to cancel a parallel task however this is a cooperative operations, in other words the algorithm writer must poll the cancellation token and take the action to cancel the algorithm etc. when the token is set to Cancel. Tasks are not interrupted or stopped in anyway, it’s down to the algorithm to detect and stop.

The task scheduler allows us to assign a custom scheduler to the parallel code.