call asynchronous methods

Question

5.00/5 (1 vote)

See more:

Hi,

I'm trying to use two asynchronous methods in one method.
the methods look like this:

C#

class Sender
{
   public static void sendMessage(Int32 uniqueRequestID, Int32 requestCode
}

class Receiver : IReceiver
{
   public override void onAnswerReceive(Int32 uniqueRequestID, Answer answer) 
   { 
       ... 
   }
}

and I'm trying to have this:

C#

class Client
{
   private Receiver;

   Data getData(Int32 code)
   {
       Int32 id = this.CreateNewUniqueID();
       Sender.sendMessage(id, code);
       ....?
       return new Data(answerIGotSomehowFromReceiverOnAnswerReceive);
   }
}

also Receiver.onAnswerReceive is going to be called for a lot of answers , the link between the request and the answer is the Int32 uniqueRequestID.

So I have two problems :
1. how do I do to wait for the answer?
2. how to access the Answer from getData method in C# 4.0 ?
(I saw some articles about async/wait but as I understand it's for the next release of .NET so not usable)?

It must be a pretty common problem but I'm not sure what to look for?
One idea was to add a Dictionary<Int32, Answer> in the Receiver class, but if there are some .NET tools designed for this I would rather use them...

Any idea, link, or even code sample more than welcome.

Thanks in advance,

Posted 29-Jun-12 0:55am

William2011

Add a Solution

Comments

Sandeep Mewara 29-Jun-12 7:15am

5!Nicely asked, detailed question.

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov 29-Jun-12 14:00pm

I see. I would ask you the following? Why would you consider using asynchronous approach?
--SA

1 solution

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov · Answer 1 · 2012-06-29T08:03:00

Let me continue from the question I asked in my comment to the question.

I think that asynchronous API flourished when threads were not a commonplace; and these days they finally lost their purposes, except supporting some legacy. Using purely synchronous approaches with all blocking call but in separate threads is much better. You follow mostly sequential logic, you use commonly thread synchronization primitives and techniques you need to use anyway, you have much more of much clearer control. By those reasons, such multithreading code becomes more reliable, easier to test and debug.

—SA