views:

542

answers:

3

I know there are other posts that say you can create a control and then check the InvokeRequired property to see if the current thread is the main thread or not. The problem is that you have no way of knowing if that control itself was created on the main thread.

I am using the following code to tell if a thread is the main thread (the thread that started the process):

     if (Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState() != ApartmentState.STA ||
                        Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId != 1 ||
                        Thread.CurrentThread.IsBackground || Thread.CurrentThread.IsThreadPoolThread)
{
    // not the main thread
}

Does anyone know a better way? It seems like this way might be prone to errors or break in future versions of the runtime...

+2  A: 

If you're using Windows Forms or WPF, you can check to see if SynchronizationContext.Current is not null.

The main thread will get a valid SynchronizationContext set to the current context upon startup in Windows Forms and WPF.

Reed Copsey
+1 - Deleted mine
Kyle Rozendo
And what if you start a MessagePump (Application.Run()) on a second Thread?
Henk Holterman
@Henk: I personally don't recommend doing that, typically, but it will potentially mess this up if you do, AND if you use that thread to check to see if it's the "main" thread... In that situation, Henk's answer is pretty much the only option, but it's one I don't particularly love.
Reed Copsey
I checked: It gets a different SyncContext.
Henk Holterman
I think you mean Zach's answer.
Henk Holterman
What about for a Console app?
John JJ Curtis
@Henk: Yeah -that's what I meant. The Application.Run call in Windows forms (and WPF's application class) both setup a SyncContext for the message pump. If you create another one, it will generate one there. That being said, you will always be on "a" UI thread if the context isn't null (and you're not generating your own context and setting it...)
Reed Copsey
Interesting, I will have to try this
John JJ Curtis
@Jeff: SynchronizationContext is a very useful class - it lets you write "UI-threadsafe" code without taking a reference to windows forms or WPF, which basically "future proofs" it. FYI - in .net 4, it gets even better: http://reedcopsey.com/2009/11/17/synchronizing-net-4-tasks-with-the-ui-thread/
Reed Copsey
@Jeff: Console apps and services have no synchronization context, so this won't work. In that situation, you'll want to use Zach's approach (although I'd do it slightly differently - see my comment there).
Reed Copsey
+2  A: 

Try this one if (Application.MessageLoop) . I think it is rare case to have more than 1 thread to process messages

Andrey
+5  A: 

You could do it like this:

// Do this when you start your application
static int mainThreadId;

// In Main method:
mainThreadId = System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId;

// If called in the non main thread, will return false;
public static bool IsMainThread
{
    get { return System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId == mainThreadId; }
}

EDIT I realized you could do it with reflection too, here is a snippet for that:

public static void CheckForMainThread()
{
    if (Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState() == ApartmentState.STA &&
        !Thread.CurrentThread.IsBackground && !Thread.CurrentThread.IsThreadPoolThread && Thread.CurrentThread.IsAlive)
    {
        MethodInfo correctEntryMethod = Assembly.GetEntryAssembly().EntryPoint;
        StackTrace trace = new StackTrace();
        StackFrame[] frames = trace.GetFrames();
        for (int i = frames.Length - 1; i >= 0; i--)
        {
            MethodBase method = frames[i].GetMethod();
            if (correctEntryMethod == method)
            {
                return;
            }
        }
    }

    // throw exception, the current thread is not the main thread...
}
Zach Johnson
Looks like the best shot to me.
Henk Holterman
As long as you guarantee that this static is initialized from the main thread this would work. What about if this cannot be guaranteed? What if the class is first instantiated from another thread?
John JJ Curtis
@Jeff: You'd have to explicitly do this in your entry method, or it not work. Personally, I would not initialize it inline, but do it directly in your Main() routine, as then you're guaranteed it's handled correctly, and it's more obvious. That being said, unless you're messing with multiple message pumps (which I feel is a bad practice), using the SynchronizationContext will work perfectly.
Reed Copsey
@Jeff Johnson: As long as you set `mainThreadId` on the main thread, you will be ok. The main method is a good place to do that. If you do not have access to the main method (or a method immediately called by it on the main thread), then this solution will likely not work for you.
Zach Johnson
Seems like this one will handle all my cases, although it will require an additional call as the first line in all my Main entry points, but it's worth it to ensure that my C++ / COM interop works, thanks!
John JJ Curtis
@Reed Copsey: Setting `mainThreadId` in the main method was my original intent with my answer, but I guess it did not come off that way.
Zach Johnson
@Zach: You had it listed inline before. Just so you know, in CLR 2, that's fine, but in CLR 4, listing inline would "break" this unless the first time you checked it happened to be from the main thread....
Reed Copsey