views:

903

answers:

6

Is there any way to stop a running loop inside another method or insert a break statement dynamically in C#?

Thanks

Edit : I want to be able to dynamically intercept the method and insert a break to stop the loop when an event gets triggered in another function.I have several instances of the class and I want to stop the loop in each instance whenever required and manage all the instances. Consider multiple instances to be in a generic list

Example :

List<myclass> objlist=new List<myclass>();

foreach(myclass obj in objlist)
{
obj.loopingfunction().BreakLoop //or something like this (assuming that the loopingfunction is already called)
}

I need this because I want to break the loop once the user stores some huge amount of data.When the user imports the data,I get a event fired. But I cannot keep checking the database from multiple instances since it screws up sqlserver.

This is in an ASP.Net application.

+2  A: 

Have the condition in a locked property.

private Boolean BreakCondition
{
    get { lock(_LockObject) { return _BreakCondition; }  }
    set { lock(_LockObject) { _BreakCondition = value; }  }
}
private Boolean _BreakCondition = false;
private Object _LockObject = new Object();


if (this.BreakCondition)
{
    break;
}
ChaosPandion
You may want to lock that `if` as well.
Kobi
What do you mean?
ChaosPandion
This is very useless, accessing a boolean value is atomic.
Nicolas Viennot
I've done many multi-threaded apps the same way. Why don't you give a few more details as to why this is useless.
ChaosPandion
One thread will update the boolean while the worker thread will poll the boolean every other loop for example.
ChaosPandion
You are basically using a mutex to make an operation atomic. But it was already atomic at the first place.Maybe you want to use the volatile keyword instead (which is good for polling while another thread is modifying it) ?
Nicolas Viennot
You know you are right.. but why be so blunt about it?
ChaosPandion
Sorry for beeing an asshole. I was stressed.
Nicolas Viennot
+1  A: 

I think you can use flag

bool stop = false;

for(int i=0;i<num;i++) 
{
 if(stop) break;
}
x2
+4  A: 

If the whole thing is running in a single thread, it wouldn't make any sense. If the loop is running, then nothing else is running at the same time. If you're running a loop on another thread and the controlling method on another thread, you can either abort the loop thread completely or check a flag inside the loop to decide whether or not you should break and set the flag appropriately in the controlling method.

Update: make that function return a boolean value indicating whether you should break and use it in an "if" statement:

if (myFunctionShouldBreakLoop()) break;
Mehrdad Afshari
In the single thread case, his code might be a delegate invoked from inside the loop, in which case I can see scenarios where he'd like to interrupt the loop. Not that it makes it easier...
Franci Penov
Franci: In that case, it's not really "dynamically" breaking. Basically it's just polling another method and uses its return value to see if it should break or not.
Mehrdad Afshari
Problem is that I cannot check myFunctionShouldBreakLoop() since ....in my case,that function has to access the database and check if the user has saved the data.
Josh
@Josh a little more detail please. This work only in a single thread "if (myFunctionShouldBreakLoop()) break;" only. You should make a class that contain "Public bool IsBreak;" And use the if function to do so. This will work with multi-thread.
Jonathan Shepherd
ok..i got a bit creative...Actually a combination of your answer with chandmk helped...thanks...
Josh
+3  A: 

Another option would be to raise a CancelEventArgs during every iteration of the loop. Probably not the most efficient, but another option nonetheless:

    private void SomeMethod()
    {
        for (int i = 0; i <= 100000; i++)
        {
            Console.WriteLine(i);
            if (LoopIncrement != null)
            {
                CancelEventArgs args = new CancelEventArgs();
                LoopIncrement(null, args);
                if (args.Cancel)
                {
                    break;
                }
            }
        }

And then elsewhere:

myObj.LoopIncrement += MyHandler;

private void MyHandler(object sender, CancelEventArgs e)
{
   if(someCondition)
   {
      e.Cancel = true;
   }
}

This way you can somewhat control the loop from outside....

BFree
A: 

The short answer is: no. If you don't control the code, then you can't cause the loop to terminate.

If you do control the code, you could build in some sort of cooperation, but it sounds messy. Maybe you can elaborate on why?

Brannon
+1  A: 

How about using iterators, and yield magic to solve the problem.

Here is an article on infinite lists that might be useful

http://www.codethinked.com/post/2009/02/04/Infinite-Lists-With-C-Yield.aspx

 class Program
    {
        static void Main(string[] args)
        {
            Predicate<int> when = i => i > 100 && Console.ReadKey().KeyChar.ToString() == "0";

            foreach(var i in Numbers().BreakOn(when))
            {
                Console.WriteLine(i);
            }

            Console.ReadLine();
        }

        private static IEnumerable<int> Numbers()
        {
            var i = 0;
            while(true)
            {
                yield return i++;
            }
        }


    }

    public static class Util
    {
        public static IEnumerable<int> BreakOn(this IEnumerable<int> sequence, Predicate<int> when)
        {
            foreach(int i in sequence)
            {
                if(when(i))
                {
                    yield break;
                }
                yield return i;
            }
        }
}
wow,that's a fantastic idea. yield could give me something of a similar syntax. I love the way the guy explains it. Simply superb....the part he calls academical. But then...practically,it's gonna be a loop to check and set a boolean value.Thanks for this idea and the article
Josh
I love the article and your idea.But,Ultimately,i need a way to break the loop with an external function even if I use yield and external methods right? How do i break it in the middle?
Josh
It would be something similar to Take(100). The infinite loop breaks when the count reaches 100. So you need to define an extension method for IEnumerable and use 'yield break;' when your breaking condition is met. As you can chain all the iterators together and each item is processed like items on conveyor belt the loop ends when your code reaches yield break.
It's not a finite loop.I need the loop to end whenever the user intervenes it through some action
Josh
I added a sample that attempts to print first 100 numbers and checks for user input before continuing..
Thanks for the sample....but I think I have a bit of learning curve here about predicate and stuff. Thanks for this kind of code and the link...It helps me although i didn't expect it...I like this kind it.....provokes me to learn more :) .Be blessed! But,i have to accept the other guys answer to be fair since it's actually relevant.
Josh