Reputation: 5084
I understand that the .Join() causes the threads to pause and wait till a thread finishes its work but how can I avoid the UI from getting frozen? This is what my codes look like"
Thread dataThread = new Thread(()=> data = getData(id));
dataThread.Start();
dataThread.Join();
Thread storingThread = new Thread(()=> storeData(data));
storingThread.Start();
I need to have the Join since the first thread returns an object containing data that needs to be stored through the second thread. But this causes a UI freeze. How can I implement these in maybe a Background thread? What do yall think I should change?
Upvotes: 4
Views: 4549
Reputation: 2663
Use the async / await keywords. Small example code:
private async void Method()
{
var result = await ExecuteAsync();
// result == true
}
private async Task<bool> ExecuteAsync()
{
//run long running action
return true;
}
In .net 4.0 you need to install Microsoft.Bcl.Async
to use this feature.
A good introduction in this feature can be read on http://blog.stephencleary.com/2012/02/async-and-await.html
Upvotes: 2
Reputation: 31696
Put the whole work into one thread so the UI doesn't stop:
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem( () => storeData(getData(id)));
Or for .Net 4
Task.Factory.StartNew(() => storeData(getData(id)));
Upvotes: 2
Reputation: 1346
The answer has already been given. Just as an extra, I give mine.
You can also use ContinueWith like this:
Task<string>.Factory.StartNew(() => "Hey!").ContinueWith(t => Console.WriteLine(t.Result));
Upvotes: 2
Reputation: 1312
If you are using .Net framework >= 4.5 you can use Tasks
await Task.Run(() => data = getData(id));
await Task.Run(() => storeData(data));
Or in one command
await Task.Run(() => storeData(getData(id)));
If you don't have to wait till it's finished you can also do:
Task.Run(() => storeData(getData(id)));
Upvotes: 4
Reputation: 171206
It seems you don't need two threads:
Thread dataThread = new Thread(() => storeData(getData(id)));
dataThread.Start();
Note, that Task
is preferable to Thread
. Also, you probably should make use of await.
Upvotes: 2