C# 异步任务的顺序处理
声明:本页面是StackOverFlow热门问题的中英对照翻译,遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议,如果您需要使用它,必须同样遵循CC BY-SA许可,注明原文地址和作者信息,同时你必须将它归于原作者(不是我):StackOverFlow
原文地址: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14630770/
Warning: these are provided under cc-by-sa 4.0 license. You are free to use/share it, But you must attribute it to the original authors (not me):
StackOverFlow
Sequential processing of asynchronous tasks
提问by Daniel Hilgarth
Assume the following synchronous code:
假设以下同步代码:
try
{
Foo();
Bar();
Fubar();
Console.WriteLine("All done");
}
catch(Exception e) // For illustration purposes only. Catch specific exceptions!
{
Console.WriteLine(e);
}
Now assume all these methods have an Async counterpart and I have to use those for some reason, so simply wrapping the whole thing in a new task is not an option.
How would I achieve the same behavior?
What I mean with "same" is:
现在假设所有这些方法都有一个 Async 对应物,我出于某种原因必须使用它们,所以简单地将整个事情包装在一个新任务中不是一个选择。
我将如何实现相同的行为?
我对“相同”的意思是:
- Execute a handler for the exception, if one is thrown.
- Stop execution of the following methods, if an exception is thrown.
- 如果抛出异常,则执行异常处理程序。
- 如果抛出异常,则停止执行以下方法。
The only thing I was able to come up with is horrible:
我唯一能想到的是可怕的:
var fooTask = FooAsync();
fooTask.ContinueWith(t => HandleError(t.Exception),
TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
fooTask.ContinueWith(
t =>
{
var barTask = BarAsync();
barTask.ContinueWith(t => HandleError(t.Exception),
TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
barTask.ContinueWith(
t =>
{
var fubarTask = FubarAsync();
fubarTask.ContinueWith(t => HandleError(t.Exception),
TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
fubarTask.ContinueWith(
t => Console.WriteLine("All done"),
TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
},
TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
},
TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
Please note:
请注意:
- I need a solution that works with .NET 4, so
async/await
is out of the question. However, if it would work withasync/await
feel free to show how. - I don't need to use the TPL. If it is impossible with the TPL another approach would be OK, maybe with Reactive Extensions?
- 我需要一个适用于 .NET 4 的解决方案,所以这
async/await
是不可能的。但是,如果它可以使用,请async/await
随时展示如何使用。 - 我不需要使用 TPL。如果 TPL 不可能,另一种方法也可以,也许使用 Reactive Extensions?
采纳答案by Stephen Cleary
Here's how it would work with async
:
这是它的工作方式async
:
try
{
await FooAsync();
await BarAsync();
await FubarAsync();
Console.WriteLine("All done");
}
catch(Exception e) // For illustration purposes only. Catch specific exceptions!
{
Console.WriteLine(e);
}
This would work on .NET 4.0 if you installed the (prerelease) Microsoft.Bcl.Async package.
如果您安装了(预发行版)Microsoft.Bcl.Async 包,这将适用于 .NET 4.0 。
Since you're stuck on VS2010, you can use a variant of Stephen Toub's Then
:
由于您坚持使用 VS2010,您可以使用Stephen Toub 的Then
变体:
public static Task Then(this Task first, Func<Task> next)
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<object>();
first.ContinueWith(_ =>
{
if (first.IsFaulted) tcs.TrySetException(first.Exception.InnerExceptions);
else if (first.IsCanceled) tcs.TrySetCanceled();
else
{
try
{
next().ContinueWith(t =>
{
if (t.IsFaulted) tcs.TrySetException(t.Exception.InnerExceptions);
else if (t.IsCanceled) tcs.TrySetCanceled();
else tcs.TrySetResult(null);
}, TaskContinuationOptions.ExecuteSynchronously);
}
catch (Exception exc) { tcs.TrySetException(exc); }
}
}, TaskContinuationOptions.ExecuteSynchronously);
return tcs.Task;
}
You can use it as such:
你可以这样使用它:
var task = FooAsync().Then(() => BarAsync()).Then(() => FubarAsync());
task.ContinueWith(t =>
{
if (t.IsFaulted || t.IsCanceled)
{
var e = t.Exception.InnerException;
// exception handling
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("All done");
}
}, TaskContinuationOptions.ExcecuteSynchronously);
Using Rx, it would look like this (assuming you don't have the async
methods already exposed as IObservable<Unit>
):
使用 Rx,它看起来像这样(假设您没有async
公开的方法IObservable<Unit>
):
FooAsync().ToObservable()
.SelectMany(_ => BarAsync().ToObservable())
.SelectMany(_ => FubarAsync().ToObservable())
.Subscribe(_ => { Console.WriteLine("All done"); },
e => { Console.WriteLine(e); });
I think. I'm not an Rx master, by any means. :)
我认为。无论如何,我不是 Rx 大师。:)
回答by Chris Sinclair
Now, I haven't really used the TPL much, so this is just a stab in the dark. And given what @Servy mentioned, perhaps this won't run completely asynchronously. But I figured I'd post it and if it's wayoff the mark, you can downvote me to oblivion or I can have it deleted (or we can just fix what needs fixing)
现在,我并没有真正使用 TPL,所以这只是在黑暗中的一个刺。考虑到@Servy 提到的内容,也许这不会完全异步运行。但我想我会发布它,如果它的方式没谱,你可以downvote我遗忘或者我可以把它删除(或者我们可以只解决什么需要修理)
public void RunAsync(Action onComplete, Action<Exception> errorHandler, params Action[] actions)
{
if (actions.Length == 0)
{
//what to do when no actions/tasks provided?
onComplete();
return;
}
List<Task> tasks = new List<Task>(actions.Length);
foreach(var action in actions)
{
Task task = new Task(action);
task.ContinueWith(t => errorHandler(t.Exception), TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
tasks.Add(task);
}
//last task calls onComplete
tasks[actions.Length - 1].ContinueWith(t => onComplete(), TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
//wire all tasks to execute the next one, except of course, the last task
for (int i = 0; i <= actions.Length - 2; i++)
{
var nextTask = tasks[i + 1];
tasks[i].ContinueWith(t => nextTask.Start(), TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
}
tasks[0].Start();
}
And it would have usage like:
它的用法如下:
RunAsync(() => Console.WriteLine("All done"),
ex => Console.WriteLine(ex),
Foo,
Bar,
Fubar);
Thoughts? Downvotes? :)
想法?否决票?:)
(I definitely prefer async/await though)
(不过我绝对更喜欢 async/await)
EDIT: Based on your comments to take Func<Task>
, would this be a proper implementation?
编辑:根据您的意见Func<Task>
,这会是一个正确的实现吗?
public void RunAsync(Action onComplete, Action<Exception> errorHandler, params Func<Task>[] actions)
{
if (actions.Length == 0)
{
//what to do when no actions/tasks provided?
onComplete();
return;
}
List<Task> tasks = new List<Task>(actions.Length);
foreach (var action in actions)
{
Func<Task> nextActionFunc = action;
Task task = new Task(() =>
{
var nextTask = nextActionFunc();
nextTask.ContinueWith(t => errorHandler(t.Exception), TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
nextTask.Start();
});
tasks.Add(task);
}
//last task calls onComplete
tasks[actions.Length - 1].ContinueWith(t => onComplete(), TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
//wire all tasks to execute the next one, except of course, the last task
for (int i = 0; i <= actions.Length - 2; i++)
{
var nextTask = tasks[i + 1];
tasks[i].ContinueWith(t => nextTask.Start(), TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
}
tasks[0].Start();
}
回答by Lee
You should be able to create a method to combine two tasks, and only start the second if the first succeeds.
您应该能够创建一个方法来组合两个任务,并且只有在第一个成功时才启动第二个。
public static Task Then(this Task parent, Task next)
{
TaskCompletionSource<object> tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<object>();
parent.ContinueWith(pt =>
{
if (pt.IsFaulted)
{
tcs.SetException(pt.Exception.InnerException);
}
else
{
next.ContinueWith(nt =>
{
if (nt.IsFaulted)
{
tcs.SetException(nt.Exception.InnerException);
}
else { tcs.SetResult(null); }
});
next.Start();
}
});
return tcs.Task;
}
you can then chain tasks together:
然后您可以将任务链接在一起:
Task outer = FooAsync()
.Then(BarAsync())
.Then(FubarAsync());
outer.ContinueWith(t => {
if(t.IsFaulted) {
//handle exception
}
});
If your tasks are started immediately you can just wrap them in a Func
:
如果您的任务立即开始,您可以将它们包装在一个Func
:
public static Task Then(this Task parent, Func<Task> nextFunc)
{
TaskCompletionSource<object> tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<object>();
parent.ContinueWith(pt =>
{
if (pt.IsFaulted)
{
tcs.SetException(pt.Exception.InnerException);
}
else
{
Task next = nextFunc();
next.ContinueWith(nt =>
{
if (nt.IsFaulted)
{
tcs.SetException(nt.Exception.InnerException);
}
else { tcs.SetResult(null); }
});
}
});
return tcs.Task;
}
回答by Daniel Hilgarth
Just for the sake of completeness, that's how I would implement the helper method suggested by Chris Sinclair:
为了完整起见,这就是我将如何实现 Chris Sinclair 建议的辅助方法:
public void RunSequential(Action onComplete, Action<Exception> errorHandler,
params Func<Task>[] actions)
{
RunSequential(onComplete, errorHandler,
actions.AsEnumerable().GetEnumerator());
}
public void RunSequential(Action onComplete, Action<Exception> errorHandler,
IEnumerator<Func<Task>> actions)
{
if(!actions.MoveNext())
{
onComplete();
return;
}
var task = actions.Current();
task.ContinueWith(t => errorHandler(t.Exception),
TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
task.ContinueWith(t => RunSequential(onComplete, errorHandler, actions),
TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
}
This ensures that each subsequent task is only requested when the previous one completed successfully.
It assumes that the Func<Task>
returns an already running task.
这确保了每个后续任务仅在前一个任务成功完成时才被请求。
它假设Func<Task>
返回一个已经运行的任务。
回答by Servy
What you have here is essentially a ForEachAsync
. You want to run each async item, sequentially, but with some error handling support. Here is one such implementation:
你在这里拥有的本质上是一个ForEachAsync
. 您希望按顺序运行每个异步项,但具有一些错误处理支持。这是一个这样的实现:
public static Task ForEachAsync(IEnumerable<Func<Task>> tasks)
{
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>();
Task currentTask = Task.FromResult(false);
foreach (Func<Task> function in tasks)
{
currentTask.ContinueWith(t => tcs.TrySetException(t.Exception.InnerExceptions)
, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
currentTask.ContinueWith(t => tcs.TrySetCanceled()
, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnCanceled);
Task<Task> continuation = currentTask.ContinueWith(t => function()
, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
currentTask = continuation.Unwrap();
}
currentTask.ContinueWith(t => tcs.TrySetException(t.Exception.InnerExceptions)
, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
currentTask.ContinueWith(t => tcs.TrySetCanceled()
, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnCanceled);
currentTask.ContinueWith(t => tcs.TrySetResult(true)
, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
return tcs.Task;
}
I added in support for canceled tasks as well, just to be more general and because it took so little to do.
我还添加了对取消任务的支持,只是为了更通用,因为它需要做的事情很少。
It adds each task as a continuation of the previous task, and all along the line it ensures that any exceptions result in the final task's exception being set.
它将每个任务添加为前一个任务的延续,并且始终确保任何异常都会导致设置最终任务的异常。
Here is an example usage:
这是一个示例用法:
public static Task FooAsync()
{
Console.WriteLine("Started Foo");
return Task.Delay(1000)
.ContinueWith(t => Console.WriteLine("Finished Foo"));
}
public static Task BarAsync()
{
return Task.Factory.StartNew(() => { throw new Exception(); });
}
private static void Main(string[] args)
{
List<Func<Task>> list = new List<Func<Task>>();
list.Add(() => FooAsync());
list.Add(() => FooAsync());
list.Add(() => FooAsync());
list.Add(() => FooAsync());
list.Add(() => BarAsync());
Task task = ForEachAsync(list);
task.ContinueWith(t => Console.WriteLine(t.Exception.ToString())
, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnFaulted);
task.ContinueWith(t => Console.WriteLine("Done!")
, TaskContinuationOptions.OnlyOnRanToCompletion);
}