With Timer objects, I can set the SynchronizingObject property to avoid having to use invoke when updating the GUI from the timer's event handler. If I have a class that instead subscribes to an event and has to update the GUI in the event handler, is there an analogous concept? Or do I have to write the InvokeRequired boilerplate code?
Asked
Active
Viewed 5,653 times
3
Georg Fritzsche
- 97,545
- 26
- 194
- 236
toasteroven
- 2,700
- 3
- 26
- 35
2 Answers
3
SynchronizingObject is just an ISynchronizeInvoke property. (That interface is implemented by WinForms controls, for example.)
You can use the same interface yourself, although with a vanilla event there's nowhere to really specify the synchronization object.
What you could do is write a utility method which takes a delegate and an ISynchronizeInvoke, and returns a delegate which makes sure the original delegate is run on the right thread.
For example:
public static EventHandler<T> Wrap<T>(EventHandler<T> original,
ISynchronizeInvoke synchronizingObject) where T : EventArgs
{
return (object sender, T args) =>
{
if (synchronizingObject.InvokeRequired)
{
synchronizingObject.Invoke(original, new object[] { sender, args });
}
else
{
original(sender, args);
}
};
}
Jon Skeet
- 1,421,763
- 867
- 9,128
- 9,194
-
Is this class appropriate to use when I want to synchronize with a self-defined class (not winforms) as shown here: http://stackoverflow.com/q/10654163/328397 – makerofthings7 May 18 '12 at 16:25
-
@makerofthings7: I don't think it's the approach I'd use in that case, no. If you're using .NET 4, look at what the TPL provides. – Jon Skeet May 18 '12 at 16:27
