|
Of course, each thread needs its own stack, since threads can be switched in and out
at (almost) any point during their execution, so they must keep their call chain information
independent of each other.
Therefore the kernel will unload and reload all the CPU registers, including the
stack pointer, when switching from one thread to another.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Luc,
I read your points before again. Your approach of checking whether an object is live or not in heap is to check whether there are any reference from stack.
I agree but I am not sure whether it is enough in general situations. Why you do not check whether there are reference from not only stack variable, but also from heap variable -- to decide whether an object is live or not?
--------------------
I was inaccurate for the heap; most systems use a variation of this scheme:
- stop all threads;
- walk the heap ONLY to mark all objects as dead;
- then perform the algorithm based on the thread stacks (and CPU registers),
marking the live objects as not-dead (see below);
- resume all threads;
- walk the heap to delete all objects that are still marked dead.
There are different schemes (e.g. for better real-time behavior, not really a Windows thing),
for better performance (with generations, implemented in MS .NET), etc. Some are completely
different (e.g. based on reference counts, which is very hard to get right
in cyclic situations). The last step (delete) can be delegated to another (low-prio)
thread.
--------------------
regards,
George
|
|
|
|
|
Hi George,
an object is alive if there is a (theoretical) probability that one of the process threads
will touch the object. Now where is a thread's knowledge about objects? it is in the data
it knows to access, i.e. the stack (containing stack frames from earlier methods that lead
to the invocation of the current method, and containing local variables for the current
method). It is not in other data, the thread would not know how to find other data, remember
there is no such thing as global variables in OO, so everything the thread is supposed to
work on must be given to it or created by it.
Of course, as soon as an object A is marked "alive", all its data members must also be
inspected; object A could contain references to other objects B, C, ... and being alive itself,
those would automatically be alive too.
Example: a local variable of type List may be passed in as an argument to a method,
and the List may contain any number of Control objects; each of those Controls in turn
would have names, texts, fonts, whatever.
Typical app example: a windows app starting up has one thread, no objects (apart from the
command line args that are passed to static main). It creates a new MyForm
then passes it to Application.Run to make it visible and give it a message pump.
The form may create new threads and pass parameters to them, etc. So new objects get
created and most of the time somehow linked to existing objects through the class members
of MyForm and others.
But there is no magic way to keep objects alive; if none of the threads has any reference
to a specific object, then none of them will be able to touch it ever again, hence the
object is dead.
Well actually there are some methods such as GC.KeepAlive() to mark objects for special cases,
e.g. when the managed world wants to pass an object to unmanaged (native) code and wants
to object to stay alive even when the managed side no longer holds a reference to it.
Final remark: the cyclic reference example I gave earlier (A holds ref to B, B holds ref to A,
none of the threads knows about the existence of A and B, hence both A and B are dead)
proves that you cannot simply walk the heap and decide about live and dead for objects,
since doing so would keep A and B alive no matter what.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Luc,
Your reply is great! However I do not fully agree with two more comments.
1.
Luc Pattyn wrote: there is no such thing as global variables in OO
We can have global/static variables in C#. I think such kinds of variables are exception to your thread-touched live rule. Means, those global/static variables will always live from process begin to process ends. Any comments?
2.
Luc Pattyn wrote: proves that you cannot simply walk the heap and decide about live and dead for objects,
since doing so would keep A and B alive no matter what.
I do not agree. I think we can still prove A and B are dead since we can not touch them from any threads. Why do you think we can not prove anything?
regards,
George
|
|
|
|
|
Hi George,
1.
yes, static data members of a class are globals once the class got loaded, and as such
they remain alive as long as the class does; which is as long as the AppDomain does where
the class got loaded; which is until you unload the AppDomain. (By default there is just
the one AppDomain, and you may not even be aware of it).
So, yes, all these static members form another base for the GC the look for live objects.
I see you are getting the picture quite well.
2.
if you were to try and prove the island formed by objects A and B is reachable/unreachable
(and hence alive/dead), you would have to build the entire reference graph and study its
connectivity. If you find several loose groups, you would still have to find out which
groups are reachable (from the stack and the globals) and which are not. Simply looking
at four objects interconnected two-by-two (i.e. A---B and C---D) cannot possibly tell
you which group is alive or dead. So there is nothing much to be gained by studying the
heap itself.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Luc,
1.
In your sample before,
--------------------
Final remark: the cyclic reference example I gave earlier (A holds ref to B, B holds ref to A,
none of the threads knows about the existence of A and B, hence both A and B are dead)
--------------------
Do you mean we can not identify whether A and B are live or not? Why we can not identify? I think from your algorithm, at the beginning, mark all objects as dead, then if no variables refer A or B, they will be dead. It is easy to jusge live and dead in the situation you mentioned above, why you think we can not judge?
2.
In C# all the variables must be wrapped in class {}, so it is why you think there is no global variable in C# -- all belong to class context?
regards,
George
|
|
|
|
|
Hi George,
you somehow misunderstood a few things.
1.
the algorithm I described will perfectly judge live/dead on a A---B cluster.
What I said or meant to say is it would not be sufficient to just look at the objects
themselves, you really need to start looking from the known world i.e. stacks and globals.
2.
a class is not an object, a class is not alive; it is either loaded and initialized, or not.
As soon as the class got initialized all static members that have initializers have been
created and are alive (until the class, hence AppDomain, gets removed).
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Luc,
Two more comments.
1.
Luc Pattyn wrote: 1.
the algorithm I described will perfectly judge live/dead on a A---B cluster.
What I said or meant to say is it would not be sufficient to just look at the objects
themselves, you really need to start looking from the known world i.e. stacks and globals.
I understand your points now. Your points are, we should not just look at the object themselves, but also whether there are live stack/static variables refer to them, right?
If yes, I think from your algoriothm, cyclic referenced dead variables could be detected, since no one refers to either A or B, right?
2.
Luc Pattyn wrote: 2.
a class is not an object, a class is not alive; it is either loaded and initialized, or not.
As soon as the class got initialized all static members that have initializers have been
created and are alive (until the class, hence AppDomain, gets removed).
Sorry, I have not made my question clear. My points is, all the variables in C# must be defined into class brackets -- { and }, e.g. we can not define a variable outside class brackets into namespace brackets directly, right?
regards,
George
|
|
|
|
|
Hi George,
yes to all.
there are no variables in a namespace, just types (classes, structs, ...)
all variables are inside classes, i.e. when non-static they are inside an object (= an instance
of that class); and when static they are "global" i.e. they are not inside another object,
so you access them (if public) with classnmame.varname so you don't need a reference to
anything, just names.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Cool, Luc.
So, the conclusion for this dicussion is, roots (or say, object instances pointed by rules) must be live. Right?
regards,
George
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I want to use FileStream.Read method to read a file but I want it in such a way that I will read a chunk of the whole file instead of reading it all at once.
For instance, I want to read 1KB of data (out of the 1MB), and say do something to that 1KB then proceed to the next 1KB.
Please advise. Thanks!
It is said that the most complex structures built by mankind are software systems. This is not generally appreciated because most people cannot see them. Maybe that's a good thing because if we saw them as buildings, we'd deem many of them unsafe.
|
|
|
|
|
huh?! FileStream.Read works exactly like that! Did you even look at the documentation?
"Reads a block of bytes from the stream and writes the data in a given buffer."
|
|
|
|
|
Woops, yeah, I've looked at the documentation at MSDN. I've figured it out eventually.
It is said that the most complex structures built by mankind are software systems. This is not generally appreciated because most people cannot see them. Maybe that's a good thing because if we saw them as buildings, we'd deem many of them unsafe.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a class called Category which extends ToolStripMenuItem. It also overrides ToolStripMenuItem' ToString method via "new public string ToString () {}". I have an array of Categories and I add them to the combobox: this.cmb_categories.Items.AddRange (categories);
But when I show the form there's two items in the list like there should be but there's no text. I also have a button, that when click calls the ToString method of the selected category but I keep getting a NullReferenceException. I've tried calling Update(), Invalidate(), PerformLayout () and Refresh () on the combo box but it's not working. I've also tried switching from .Net 3.5 to .Net 2.0 but that's not working either.
|
|
|
|
|
Jordanwb wrote: It also overrides ToolStripMenuItem' ToString method via "new public string ToString () {}".
That is a contradiction, it is either override or new. And it seems you want override.
Have it return a constant (say return "aha";) to convince yourself it gets called.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Tried "public override string ToString ()" and it doesn't work either. Still wouldn't explain the NullReferenceException.
|
|
|
|
|
The NullRefExc has nothing to do with the .NET version, it indicates there is a bug in
your code. Either single-step through it, or look at the Exception.ToString() output
to pinpoint the exact line that causes it.
And publish the Exception as well as (the relevant parts of) your code here if you want
detailed help.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm no longer getting the NullReferenceException for some strange reason, but if I use "new public string ToString ()" or "public override string ToString ()", text isn't showing up in the ComboBox.
|
|
|
|
|
I need to see some code in order to have a chance helping you any further.
Did you single-step the relevant code? did you look at intermediate results?
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Okee Dokey.
Category class (irrelevant code ommitted)
<code>
public class Category : ToolStripMenuItem
{
public Category(int id, string name)
{
this.id = id;
this.Text = name;
this.sub_items = new List<Program>();
}
public override string ToString()
{
return this.Text;
}
}
</code>
Where I add the Categories to the ComboBox:
<code>
public partial class RemoveCategory : Form
{
public RemoveCategory(AccessReader database, HashMap<int, Category> categories)
{
InitializeComponent();
this.database = database;
this.categories = categories;
this.cmb_categories.Items.AddRange(categories.ToArray());
this.cmb_categories.SelectedIndex = 0;
}
}
</code>
The HashMap class is a class that I made that maps a key (in this case int) to a value (in this case Category), the ToArray() method returns an array of Categories that contain all the values in the HashMap. In the callback for when the button is clicked, the SelectedItem property of the ComboBox is no long returning null but is returning an object which is casted into a Category.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
you have a problem in the button click handler, but you don't show its code.
you explain about HashMap but the code you show does not use it.
you had null exceptions but they are gone without any explanation? or are they still present?
are you sure you want to be successful in software development?
start by giving all relevant code, exactly as it is, and all the symptoms, and please
combine them in a single message, to increase the possibility they describe a consistent
situation.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: you have a problem in the button click handler, but you don't show its code.
you explain about HashMap but the code you show does not use it.
you had null exceptions but they are gone without any explanation? or are they still present?
are you sure you want to be successful in software development?
start by giving all relevant code, exactly as it is, and all the symptoms, and please
combine them in a single message, to increase the possibility they describe a consistent
situation.
It's hard to have a consistent solution if the program isn't acting consistantly (flashbacks to Java). The HashMap class is irrelevant to the problem. In the Button click event I am no longer getting the NullReferenceException.
Here's the button click event:
<br />
private void btn_okay_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)<br />
{<br />
try<br />
{<br />
Category s = (Category)cmb_categories.SelectedItem;<br />
MessageBox.Show(s.ToString());<br />
}<br />
catch (NullReferenceException nre)<br />
{<br />
MessageBox.Show(nre.ToString());<br />
}<br />
}<br />
What is there to go wrong there on my end? Yesterday cmb_categories.SelectedItem was returning null, now it's not. I get a MessageBox saying "Office" or "Programming" like it should, so that would mean no NullReferenceException. The HashMap returned a proper array of Categories, no nulls whatsoever.
Also in the constructor I added this line directly after "this.cmb_categories.Items.AddRange(categories.ToArray());":
ComboBox.ObjectCollection oj = cmb_categories.Items;
oj.Count said 2, which is correct. I place a breakpoint at the line mentionned above and it reaches that line I hover over oj, then hover over "Non Public Members", then over "innerList" it shows two objects both of type Category, and the proper ToString() method of the two categories were called.
Luc Pattyn wrote: you explain about HashMap but the code you show does not use it.
Yes I did, check the constructor's parameters. I called it a HashMap because that's what it's called in Java. Until today I learned that C# has one in System.Collections.Generic, it's called a Dictionary.
Luc Pattyn wrote: are you sure you want to be successful in software development?
Who said I wanted to go into software development? I plan on going into PHP based website design.
Oh BTW, I had a similar problem with a ListBox I believe. I had one form with said ListBox, I had two different classes extend that form. On one form the add worked whereas on one class it did not. In the parent form I had a method to do an invoke to avoid the CrossThreadedCallException. Both child classes used the same method. Then for some reason the second started working for no reason whatsoever. Was that my fault? I've seen this happen dozens of times: code just starts working with everyone scratching their heads.
modified on Sunday, April 20, 2008 10:13 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I missed the relevance of HashMap due to your way of publishing code; instead of showing
real < and > signs you insert something that results in escape sequences, and instead
of using real PRE tags you use fake CODE tags; this makes reading your stuff rather hard.
If the combobox does not show the right stuff and it gets populated by an
AddRange(categories.ToArray()) then either your observation is wrong or
the ToArray() method does not function properly, which is what I expect. I don't know
what your ToArray() returns, but combobox expects either a list of strings, or a list
of items that can be displayed by calling their ToString().
Just logging the ToArray() result should pinpoint the problem.
I do not like your attitude on things that first don't work, then suddenly do work.
If "code just starts working with everyone scratching their heads" then something is
definitely wrong; it could be your PC hardware or software; more likely it is a
lack of quality and robustness in your code, something that you must learn by
investigating problems until you SOLVE them, and not until they happen to disappear.
I leave this thread here and now, its length exceeds its weight. 
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles]
This month's tips:
- before you ask a question here, search CodeProject, then Google;
- the quality and detail of your question reflects on the effectiveness of the help you are likely to get;
- use PRE tags to preserve formatting when showing multi-line code snippets.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: I missed the relevance of HashMap due to your way of publishing code; instead of showing
real < and > signs you insert something that results in escape sequences, and instead
of using real PRE tags you use fake CODE tags; this makes reading your stuff rather hard.
Whoa there, that was the forum. As soon as I put in the < and > the forum changed them to the HTML escape characters.
Luc Pattyn wrote: If the combobox does not show the right stuff and it gets populated by an
AddRange(categories.ToArray()) then either your observation is wrong or
the ToArray() method does not function properly, which is what I expect. I don't know
what your ToArray() returns, but combobox expects either a list of strings, or a list
of items that can be displayed by calling their ToString().
The AddRange method accepts an array of objects not strings. I did:
Category[] all_categories = categories.ToArray (); and it returned an array of Categories like I expected.
Luc Pattyn wrote: I do not like your attitude on things that first don't work, then suddenly do work.
Well sorry for telling it like it is. That's what happened.
Luc Pattyn wrote: If "code just starts working with everyone scratching their heads" then something is
definitely wrong; it could be your PC hardware or software; more likely it is a
lack of quality and robustness in your code, something that you must learn by
investigating problems until you SOLVE them, and not until they happen to disappear.
It's hard for simple, incredibly short code to be inefficient and unrobust. It's also hard for it to be my fault when it is adding them to the comboBox but not showing the actual text in the comboBox.
Luc Pattyn wrote: I leave this thread here and now, its length exceeds its weight.
Okay fine.
Maybe if I retype everything a fourth time it will magically start working.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I started to use c# for sometime and I don't have any certification of Microsoft. Can anyone please recommend the first certificate for me. thk in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
