Skip to main content

The Surprising Finalize Call !!!

Guess the output of the following program:-
class SomeClass : IDisposable
{
public SomeClass()
{
Trace.WriteLine("SomeClass - Attempting instance creation");
throw new Exception("Ohh !!! Not Now");
}

public void Dispose()
{
Trace.WriteLine("SomeClass::Dispose");
}

~SomeClass()
{
Trace.WriteLine("SomeClass::Finalizer");
}
}

int Main(string args[]){
try{
SomeClass sc = new SomeClass();
}catch(Exception ex){
Trace.WriteLine("Main - {0}", ex.Message);
}
}
This will be the output of the program:-
SomeClass - Attempting instance creation
Ohh !!! Not Now SomeClass::Finalizer
If you are surprised with the last line of the output, that will be the intent of our discussion. In the .NET [managed] world, the garbage collector is entirely responsible for memory management - allocation and deallocation. In C#, an instance of a class is created using the new keyword. When an instance creation is requested, first memory for the instance is allocated followed by a call to the [appropriate] constructor of the class.

To explain the surprising output, the constructor is called after the memory is allocated by the GC. When the constructor throws exception, the object or resource creation is interrupted but the memory cannot deallocated instantly since the GC is entirely responsible for memory deallocation. The GC follows a complex and non-deterministic style for deallocating or reclaiming an allocated chunk of memory. The finalizer method is the last call made on a managed object just before reclaiming memory. Hence in the above case, the finalizer is being called before reclaiming the memory allocated for an instance of SomeClass.

The above behaviour is very much different from the unmanaged C++ where when the instance creation is interrupted [by throwing an exception], the allocated memory is deallocated and reclaimed instantaneously. Also the destructor is not called in this case.

P.S: Thinking of a more detailed post on non-deterministic destruction.
1 comment

Popular posts from this blog

out, ref and InvokeMember !!!

When I was working on the .NET reflection extravaganza thing that I explained in my previous column, i learnt one another interesting thing, that is about the Type.InvokeMember. How will pass out or ref parameters for the method invoked using Type.InvokeMember ? If you are going to invoke a method with the prototypeint DoSomething(string someString, int someInt);then you would use InvokeMember like this:-object obj = someType.InvokeMember("DoSomething",
BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance,
null,
this,
new object[] {"Largest Integer", 1});or use some variables in the new object[] {...}. But what do you with the args if DoSomething takes out or ref parameters ?int DoSomething(out string someString, ref int someInt);Something like this will not work string someText = string.Empty;
int someInt = 0;
object obj = someType.InvokeMember("DoSomething",
BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic …

Passing CComPtr By Value !!!

This is about a killer bug identified by our chief software engineer in our software. What was devised for ease of use and write smart code ended up in this killer defect due to improper perception. Ok, let us go!CComPtr is a template class in ATL designed to wrap the discrete functionality of COM object management - AddRef and Release. Technically it is a smart pointer for a COM object.void SomeMethod() { CComPtr siPtr; HRESULT hr = siPtr.CoCreateInstance(CLSID_SomeComponent); siPtr->MethodOne(20, L"Hello"); }Without CComPtr, the code wouldn't be as elegant as above. The code would be spilled with AddRef and Release. Besides, writing code to Release after use under any circumstance is either hard or ugly. CComPtr automatically takes care of releasing in its destructor just like std::auto_ptr. As a C++ programmer, we must be able to appreciate the inevitability of the destructor and its immense use in writing smart code. However there is a difference between …

jqGrid: Handling array data !!!

This post is primarily a personal reference. I also consider this a tribute to Oleg, who was fundamental in improving my understanding of the jqGrid internals - the way it handles source data types, which if I may say led him in discovering a bug in jqGrid.

If you are working with local array data as the source for jqGrid, meaning you will get the data from the server but want the jqGrid not to talk to the server anymore, and want to have custom handling of the edit functionality/form and delete functionality, it is not going to be straightforward - you need to have a decent understanding of how jqGrid works, and you should be aware of the bug Oleg pointed in our discussion. I repeat this is all about using jqGrid to manage array data locally, no posting to server when you edit or delete, which is where the bug is.

$('#grid').jqGrid('navGrid', '#pager', { recreateForm: true, add: false, search: false, refresh: false, …