To illustrate, let's edit your code
using(var stream = File.Open(newFilename, FileMode.CreateNew))
{
using(var reader = new BinaryReader(file.InputStream))
{
using(var writer = new BinaryWriter(stream))
{
var chunk = new byte[ChunkSize];
Int32 count;
while((count = reader.Read(chunk, 0, ChunkSize)) > 0)
{
writer.Write(chunk, 0, count);
}
} // here we dispose of writer, which disposes of stream
} // here we dispose of reader
} // here we dispose a stream, which was already disposed of by writer
To avoid this, just create the writer directly
using(var reader = new BinaryReader(file.InputStream))
{
using(var writer = new BinaryWriter( File.Open(newFilename, FileMode.CreateNew)))
{
var chunk = new byte[ChunkSize];
Int32 count;
while((count = reader.Read(chunk, 0, ChunkSize)) > 0)
{
writer.Write(chunk, 0, count);
}
} // here we dispose of writer, which disposes of its inner stream
} // here we dispose of reader
edit
: to take into account what Eric Lippert is saying, there could indeed be a moment when the stream is only released by the finalizer if BinaryWriter throws an exception. According to the BinaryWriter code, that could occur in three cases
If (output Is Nothing) Then
Throw New ArgumentNullException("output")
End If
If (encoding Is Nothing) Then
Throw New ArgumentNullException("encoding")
End If
If Not output.CanWrite Then
Throw New ArgumentException(Environment.GetResourceString("Argument_StreamNotWritable"))
End If
- if you didn't specify an output, ie if stream is null. That shouldn't be a problem since a null stream means no resources to dispose of :)
- if you didn't specify an encoding. since we don't use the constructor form where the encoding is specified, there should be no problem here either (i didn't look into the encoding contructor too much, but an invalid codepage can throw)
- if you don't pass a writable stream. That should be caught quite quickly during development...
Anyway, good point, hence the edit :)