Skip to main content

Invoking methods with Out and Ref !!!

Straight to code.....

int SomeMethod(string arg1,
    string arg2,
    ref DayOfWeek arg3)
{
    // Wildest implementation!
}

The above method had to be executed on its dispatcher thread. So let unravel a bit of the wildest implementation above.

int SomeMethod(string arg1,
    string arg2,
    ref DayOfWeek arg3)
{
    if (Disptacher.CheckAccess())
    {
        var funcDelegate = (Func<string, string, DayOfWeek, int>)SomeMthod;

        return Dispatcher.Invoke(funcDelegate,
            arg1,
            arg2,
            ref arg3);
    }

    // Wilder implementation!!
}

Before you say anything, yes, the compiler spat the following errors:-

Error 1  No overload for 'SomeMethod' matches delegate 'System.Func<string,string,DayOfWeek,int>

Error 2 The best overloaded method match for 'System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.Invoke(System.Delegate, params object[])' has some invalid arguments

Error 3  Argument '4': cannot convert from 'ref System.DayOfWeek' to 'object'

I had some experience with Error 3 earlier, and I had written about it. That came in handy to resolve Error 3. So code is getting better...

int SomeMethod(string arg1,
    string arg2,
    ref DayOfWeek arg3)
{
    if (Disptacher.CheckAccess())
    {
        var funcDelegate = (Func<string, string, DayOfWeek, int>)SomeMethod;

        var args = new object[] {
            arg1,
            arg2,
            arg3
        };

        return Dispatcher.Invoke(funcDelegate, args);
    }

    // Wilder implementation!!
}

Then I was left with one Error 1. I felt I needed a hammer to bang my head to get rid of the error. And it was all nothing but stupidity, or I should have been sleepy. I have been using Func so much that I had got the feeling that it is a keyword (for lack of a better word). To realize that Func delegate had no overload of the type/sort (I was using) took an hour or so.

We can declare a delegate with same name Func as follows:-

public delegate TResult Func<T1, T2, T3, TResult>(T1 arg1,
    T2 arg2,
    ref T3 arg3);

But I declared with a different name to avoid confusion and clear up my misconception. Now the wildness of the implementation was almost unraveled except the method was not working as expected. Let us see the code cleared of all compiler errors:-

int SomeMethod(string arg1,
    string arg2,
    ref DayOfWeek arg3)
{
    if (Disptacher.CheckAccess())
    {
        var funcDelegate = (Func<string, string, DayOfWeek, int>)SomeMthod;

        var args = new object[] {
            arg1,
            arg2,
            arg3
        };

        return Dispatcher.Invoke(funcDelegate, args);
    }

    // No more implementation
    arg3 = DayOfWeek.Friday;

    return 1234;
}

What is that expected behavior that is not experienced? And what is the reason? I will write about in a short while cuz my beer stole the preference.

Hint: Why does not the client code (Code calling SomeMethod) get the correct value in DayOfWeek argument? In our case, DayOfWeek.Friday.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Extension Methods - A Polished C++ Feature !!!

Extension Method is an excellent feature in C# 3.0. It is a mechanism by which new methods can be exposed from an existing type (interface or class) without directly adding the method to the type. Why do we need extension methods anyway ? Ok, that is the big story of lamba and LINQ. But from a conceptual standpoint, the extension methods establish a mechanism to extend the public interface of a type. The compiler is smart enough to make the method a part of the public interface of the type. Yeah, that is what it does, and the intellisense is very cool in making us believe that. It is cleaner and easier (for the library developers and for us programmers even) to add extra functionality (methods) not provided in the type. That is the intent. And we know that was exercised extravagantly in LINQ. The IEnumerable was extended with a whole lot set of methods to aid the LINQ design. Remember the Where, Select etc methods on IEnumerable. An example code snippet is worth a thousand

Implementing COM OutOfProc Servers in C# .NET !!!

Had to implement our COM OOP Server project in .NET, and I found this solution from the internet after a great deal of search, but unfortunately the whole idea was ruled out, and we wrapped it as a .NET assembly. This is worth knowing. Step 1: Implement IClassFactory in a class in .NET. Use the following definition for IClassFactory. namespace COM { static class Guids { public const string IClassFactory = "00000001-0000-0000-C000-000000000046"; public const string IUnknown = "00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046"; } /// /// IClassFactory declaration /// [ComImport(), InterfaceType(ComInterfaceType.InterfaceIsIUnknown), Guid(COM.Guids.IClassFactory)] internal interface IClassFactory { [PreserveSig] int CreateInstance(IntPtr pUnkOuter, ref Guid riid, out IntPtr ppvObject); [PreserveSig] int LockServer(bool fLock); } } Step 2: [DllImport("ole32.dll")] private static extern int CoR

sizeof vs Marshal.SizeOf !!!

There are two facilities in C# to determine the size of a type - sizeof operator and Marshal.SizeOf method. Let me discuss what they offer and how they differ. Pardon me if I happen to ramble a bit. Before we settle the difference between sizeof and Marshal.SizeOf , let us discuss why would we want to compute the size of a variable or type. Other than academic, one typical reason to know the size of a type (in a production code) would be allocate memory for an array of items; typically done while using malloc . Unlike in C++ (or unmanaged world), computing the size of a type definitely has no such use in C# (managed world). Within the managed application, size does not matter; since there are types provided by the CLR for creating\managing fixed size and variable size (typed) arrays. And as per MSDN, the size cannot be computed accurately. Does that mean we don't need to compute the size of a type at all when working in the CLR world? Obviously no, else I would