Process.Start() only starts the process, it doesn’t wait until it finishes, so it doesn’t make much sense to make it async. If you still want to do it, you can do something like await Task.Run(() => Process.Start(fileName)). But, if you want to asynchronously wait for the process to finish, you can use the Exited event … Read more
What is the reasoning behind this? I’m going to assume you mean “why wasn’t it changed for for loops as well?” The answer is that for for loops, the existing behaviour makes perfect sense. If you break a for loop into: initializer condition iterator body … then the loop is roughly: { initializer; while (condition) … Read more
First, let’s clear up some terminology: “asynchronous” (async) means that it may yield control back to the calling thread before it starts. In an async method, those “yield” points are await expressions. This is very different than the term “asynchronous”, as (mis)used by the MSDN documentation for years to mean “executes on a background thread”. … Read more
Avoid async void. It has tricky semantics around error handling; I know some people call it “fire and forget” but I usually use the phrase “fire and crash”. The question is: Given a synchronous method A(), how can I call it asynchronously using async/await in a fire-and-forget manner without getting a solution that is more … Read more
In most project types, your async “up” and “down” will end at an async void event handler or returning a Task to your framework. However, Console apps do not support this. You can either just do a Wait on the returned task: static void Main() { MainAsync().Wait(); // or, if you want to avoid exceptions … Read more
In short NO From Asynchronous Programming with Async and Await : Threads The async and await keywords don’t cause additional threads to be created. Async methods don’t require multithreading because an async method doesn’t run on its own thread. The method runs on the current synchronization context and uses time on the thread only when … Read more
If I execute an asynchronous method and it runs, it surely runs on another thread. No, it typically runs on another thread. It does not surely run on another thread. Stop thinking about threads for a moment and think about the nature of asynchrony. The nature of asynchrony is: I’ve got some workflow that I … Read more
Microsoft released the Async Targeting Pack (Microsoft.Bcl.Async) through Nuget as a replacement for the AsyncCTP. You can read more about it here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/bclteam/archive/2013/04/17/microsoft-bcl-async-is-now-stable.aspx. You can read about the previous version here: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/lucian/archive/2012/04/24/async-targeting-pack.aspx. As this pack is officially supported, I now believe the best option for targeting XP + async would be using Visual Studio 2012 … Read more
int[] ids = new[] { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 }; Parallel.ForEach(ids, i => DoSomething(1, i, blogClient).Wait()); Although you run the operations in parallel with the above code, this code blocks each thread that each operation runs on. For example, if the network call takes 2 seconds, each thread hangs for 2 seconds w/o doing … Read more
Here’s a workaround I found that works for all cases (including suspended dispatchers). It’s not my code and I’m still working to fully understand it, but it does work. It can be called using: customerList = AsyncHelpers.RunSync<List<Customer>>(() => GetCustomers()); Code is from here public static class AsyncHelpers { /// <summary> /// Execute’s an async Task<T> … Read more