Why use delegates when using object remoting MarshalByRefObj?
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
My app allows plugins, I have a Core class (MarshalByRefObj) that plugins must inherit and this class offers various functionality. Now my question is, when this class is instantiated on main app domain and passed to the plugin in different app domain, what would be the benefit of using delegates in such scenario:
public class Core : MarshalByRefObject
public void DoSomething()
MyMainApp.Delegate1("SomeMethod", "Test");
So as you can see, my core class calls a delegate method on MyMainApp. I could as well just do MyMainApp.SomeMethod("test")
instead.
However in many examples online about how remoting and plugin system works, everyone seems to be using delegates. Is there any specific reason for that? Could someone give me a more practical example of why?
c# delegates marshalling
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
My app allows plugins, I have a Core class (MarshalByRefObj) that plugins must inherit and this class offers various functionality. Now my question is, when this class is instantiated on main app domain and passed to the plugin in different app domain, what would be the benefit of using delegates in such scenario:
public class Core : MarshalByRefObject
public void DoSomething()
MyMainApp.Delegate1("SomeMethod", "Test");
So as you can see, my core class calls a delegate method on MyMainApp. I could as well just do MyMainApp.SomeMethod("test")
instead.
However in many examples online about how remoting and plugin system works, everyone seems to be using delegates. Is there any specific reason for that? Could someone give me a more practical example of why?
c# delegates marshalling
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
My app allows plugins, I have a Core class (MarshalByRefObj) that plugins must inherit and this class offers various functionality. Now my question is, when this class is instantiated on main app domain and passed to the plugin in different app domain, what would be the benefit of using delegates in such scenario:
public class Core : MarshalByRefObject
public void DoSomething()
MyMainApp.Delegate1("SomeMethod", "Test");
So as you can see, my core class calls a delegate method on MyMainApp. I could as well just do MyMainApp.SomeMethod("test")
instead.
However in many examples online about how remoting and plugin system works, everyone seems to be using delegates. Is there any specific reason for that? Could someone give me a more practical example of why?
c# delegates marshalling
My app allows plugins, I have a Core class (MarshalByRefObj) that plugins must inherit and this class offers various functionality. Now my question is, when this class is instantiated on main app domain and passed to the plugin in different app domain, what would be the benefit of using delegates in such scenario:
public class Core : MarshalByRefObject
public void DoSomething()
MyMainApp.Delegate1("SomeMethod", "Test");
So as you can see, my core class calls a delegate method on MyMainApp. I could as well just do MyMainApp.SomeMethod("test")
instead.
However in many examples online about how remoting and plugin system works, everyone seems to be using delegates. Is there any specific reason for that? Could someone give me a more practical example of why?
c# delegates marshalling
c# delegates marshalling
edited Nov 11 at 14:36
J. van Langen
13.8k22342
13.8k22342
asked Nov 11 at 13:29
Alex Maher
212
212
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Most of the time the controls in a user interface are created by the main thread unless you intentionally create them in another thread. Here is the important bit: ONLY the thread which created the control can access that control.
If you call DoSomething
directly, and code in DoSomething
wants to interact with a UI control, it will not be allowed and you will get an exception. MyMainApp.Delegate1("DoSomething"
is equivalent to: Please execute the specified method on the main thread. Now it can access UI controls.
There are other reasons too but that is the most important bit to remember. See MSDN for more.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
One of the benefits would be, that the information passed to the MyMainApp.Delegate1
is serialized for transport from the plugin appdomain to the main-appdomain. The Delegate1
method will execute the DoSomething
in the main domain. They don't share memory (so no directly access to object instances is possible). So you can dynamically run methods on another appdomains. And if it's done via reflection, a plugin might be able to run unlisted methods.
I'd rather not use this type of construction, because there is no compile-time check on calling methods. I'd rather use interfaces that are in satelite assemblies. (to prevent the main-appdomain gets a reference to/loading the plugin assembly, so it can't be unloaded anymore)
The other thing:
If you call MyMainApp.SomeMethod("test")
directly. This implies that the plugin must know the definition of the plugin loader. Meaning that you get a tight coupling (from the plugin) to the 'parent' application(s version). Which makes the whole plugin structure 'useless'. You could fix that by implementing a ISupportSomeMethod
interface on the MyMainApp which is defined in a satelite assembly that is used by both the mainapp en the plugin. If your MyMainApp doesn't implement the ISupportSomeMethod
interface, the plugin isn't compatible with that program. This way your MyMainApp
can support multiple plugin structures.
In this case you prefer an event structure. Because the child object wants to trigger a method of it's parent. Too bad cross domain event calls are not useful, because your main module will load the assembly and it can't be unloaded. You could write a proxi class for that.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53249215%2fwhy-use-delegates-when-using-object-remoting-marshalbyrefobj%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Most of the time the controls in a user interface are created by the main thread unless you intentionally create them in another thread. Here is the important bit: ONLY the thread which created the control can access that control.
If you call DoSomething
directly, and code in DoSomething
wants to interact with a UI control, it will not be allowed and you will get an exception. MyMainApp.Delegate1("DoSomething"
is equivalent to: Please execute the specified method on the main thread. Now it can access UI controls.
There are other reasons too but that is the most important bit to remember. See MSDN for more.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Most of the time the controls in a user interface are created by the main thread unless you intentionally create them in another thread. Here is the important bit: ONLY the thread which created the control can access that control.
If you call DoSomething
directly, and code in DoSomething
wants to interact with a UI control, it will not be allowed and you will get an exception. MyMainApp.Delegate1("DoSomething"
is equivalent to: Please execute the specified method on the main thread. Now it can access UI controls.
There are other reasons too but that is the most important bit to remember. See MSDN for more.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Most of the time the controls in a user interface are created by the main thread unless you intentionally create them in another thread. Here is the important bit: ONLY the thread which created the control can access that control.
If you call DoSomething
directly, and code in DoSomething
wants to interact with a UI control, it will not be allowed and you will get an exception. MyMainApp.Delegate1("DoSomething"
is equivalent to: Please execute the specified method on the main thread. Now it can access UI controls.
There are other reasons too but that is the most important bit to remember. See MSDN for more.
Most of the time the controls in a user interface are created by the main thread unless you intentionally create them in another thread. Here is the important bit: ONLY the thread which created the control can access that control.
If you call DoSomething
directly, and code in DoSomething
wants to interact with a UI control, it will not be allowed and you will get an exception. MyMainApp.Delegate1("DoSomething"
is equivalent to: Please execute the specified method on the main thread. Now it can access UI controls.
There are other reasons too but that is the most important bit to remember. See MSDN for more.
answered Nov 11 at 13:56
CodingYoshi
17k22132
17k22132
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
One of the benefits would be, that the information passed to the MyMainApp.Delegate1
is serialized for transport from the plugin appdomain to the main-appdomain. The Delegate1
method will execute the DoSomething
in the main domain. They don't share memory (so no directly access to object instances is possible). So you can dynamically run methods on another appdomains. And if it's done via reflection, a plugin might be able to run unlisted methods.
I'd rather not use this type of construction, because there is no compile-time check on calling methods. I'd rather use interfaces that are in satelite assemblies. (to prevent the main-appdomain gets a reference to/loading the plugin assembly, so it can't be unloaded anymore)
The other thing:
If you call MyMainApp.SomeMethod("test")
directly. This implies that the plugin must know the definition of the plugin loader. Meaning that you get a tight coupling (from the plugin) to the 'parent' application(s version). Which makes the whole plugin structure 'useless'. You could fix that by implementing a ISupportSomeMethod
interface on the MyMainApp which is defined in a satelite assembly that is used by both the mainapp en the plugin. If your MyMainApp doesn't implement the ISupportSomeMethod
interface, the plugin isn't compatible with that program. This way your MyMainApp
can support multiple plugin structures.
In this case you prefer an event structure. Because the child object wants to trigger a method of it's parent. Too bad cross domain event calls are not useful, because your main module will load the assembly and it can't be unloaded. You could write a proxi class for that.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
One of the benefits would be, that the information passed to the MyMainApp.Delegate1
is serialized for transport from the plugin appdomain to the main-appdomain. The Delegate1
method will execute the DoSomething
in the main domain. They don't share memory (so no directly access to object instances is possible). So you can dynamically run methods on another appdomains. And if it's done via reflection, a plugin might be able to run unlisted methods.
I'd rather not use this type of construction, because there is no compile-time check on calling methods. I'd rather use interfaces that are in satelite assemblies. (to prevent the main-appdomain gets a reference to/loading the plugin assembly, so it can't be unloaded anymore)
The other thing:
If you call MyMainApp.SomeMethod("test")
directly. This implies that the plugin must know the definition of the plugin loader. Meaning that you get a tight coupling (from the plugin) to the 'parent' application(s version). Which makes the whole plugin structure 'useless'. You could fix that by implementing a ISupportSomeMethod
interface on the MyMainApp which is defined in a satelite assembly that is used by both the mainapp en the plugin. If your MyMainApp doesn't implement the ISupportSomeMethod
interface, the plugin isn't compatible with that program. This way your MyMainApp
can support multiple plugin structures.
In this case you prefer an event structure. Because the child object wants to trigger a method of it's parent. Too bad cross domain event calls are not useful, because your main module will load the assembly and it can't be unloaded. You could write a proxi class for that.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
One of the benefits would be, that the information passed to the MyMainApp.Delegate1
is serialized for transport from the plugin appdomain to the main-appdomain. The Delegate1
method will execute the DoSomething
in the main domain. They don't share memory (so no directly access to object instances is possible). So you can dynamically run methods on another appdomains. And if it's done via reflection, a plugin might be able to run unlisted methods.
I'd rather not use this type of construction, because there is no compile-time check on calling methods. I'd rather use interfaces that are in satelite assemblies. (to prevent the main-appdomain gets a reference to/loading the plugin assembly, so it can't be unloaded anymore)
The other thing:
If you call MyMainApp.SomeMethod("test")
directly. This implies that the plugin must know the definition of the plugin loader. Meaning that you get a tight coupling (from the plugin) to the 'parent' application(s version). Which makes the whole plugin structure 'useless'. You could fix that by implementing a ISupportSomeMethod
interface on the MyMainApp which is defined in a satelite assembly that is used by both the mainapp en the plugin. If your MyMainApp doesn't implement the ISupportSomeMethod
interface, the plugin isn't compatible with that program. This way your MyMainApp
can support multiple plugin structures.
In this case you prefer an event structure. Because the child object wants to trigger a method of it's parent. Too bad cross domain event calls are not useful, because your main module will load the assembly and it can't be unloaded. You could write a proxi class for that.
One of the benefits would be, that the information passed to the MyMainApp.Delegate1
is serialized for transport from the plugin appdomain to the main-appdomain. The Delegate1
method will execute the DoSomething
in the main domain. They don't share memory (so no directly access to object instances is possible). So you can dynamically run methods on another appdomains. And if it's done via reflection, a plugin might be able to run unlisted methods.
I'd rather not use this type of construction, because there is no compile-time check on calling methods. I'd rather use interfaces that are in satelite assemblies. (to prevent the main-appdomain gets a reference to/loading the plugin assembly, so it can't be unloaded anymore)
The other thing:
If you call MyMainApp.SomeMethod("test")
directly. This implies that the plugin must know the definition of the plugin loader. Meaning that you get a tight coupling (from the plugin) to the 'parent' application(s version). Which makes the whole plugin structure 'useless'. You could fix that by implementing a ISupportSomeMethod
interface on the MyMainApp which is defined in a satelite assembly that is used by both the mainapp en the plugin. If your MyMainApp doesn't implement the ISupportSomeMethod
interface, the plugin isn't compatible with that program. This way your MyMainApp
can support multiple plugin structures.
In this case you prefer an event structure. Because the child object wants to trigger a method of it's parent. Too bad cross domain event calls are not useful, because your main module will load the assembly and it can't be unloaded. You could write a proxi class for that.
edited Nov 12 at 8:34
answered Nov 11 at 14:33
J. van Langen
13.8k22342
13.8k22342
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53249215%2fwhy-use-delegates-when-using-object-remoting-marshalbyrefobj%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown