Here's the code:
static class AsyncFinally
{
static async Task<int> Func( int n )
{
try
{
Console.WriteLine( " Func: Begin #{0}", n );
await TaskEx.Delay( 100 );
Console.WriteLine( " Func: End #{0}", n );
return 0;
}
finally
{
Console.WriteLine( " Func: Finally #{0}", n );
}
}
static async Task Consumer()
{
for ( int i = 1; i <= 2; i++ )
{
Console.WriteLine( "Consumer: before await #{0}", i );
int u = await Func( i );
Console.WriteLine( "Consumer: after await #{0}", i );
}
Console.WriteLine( "Consumer: after the loop" );
}
public static void AsyncTest()
{
Task t = TaskEx.RunEx( Consumer );
t.Wait();
Console.WriteLine( "After the wait" );
}
}
Here's the output:
Consumer: before await #1
Func: Begin #1
Func: End #1
Consumer: after await #1
Consumer: before await #2
Func: Begin #2
Func: Finally #1
Func: End #2
Consumer: after await #2
Consumer: after the loop
Func: Finally #2
After the wait
As you can see, the finally block is executed much later then you'd expect.
Any workarounds?
Thanks in advance!
The Async Community Technology Preview (CTP) is a freely available download for Visual Studio 2010. The Async CTP includes the async and await keywords that are being considered for the next iterations of C# and VB.NET.
C# Language Async-Await Async/await will only improve performance if it allows the machine to do additional work.
An await expression in an async method doesn't block the current thread while the awaited task is running. Instead, the expression signs up the rest of the method as a continuation and returns control to the caller of the async method. The async and await keywords don't cause additional threads to be created.
This is an excellent catch - and I agree that there is actually a bug in the CTP here. I dug into it and here's what's going on:
This is a combination of the CTP implementation of the async compiler transformations, as well as the existing behavior of the TPL (Task Parallel Library) from .NET 4.0+. Here are the factors at play:
Task
for the Func(int n)
method is a real TPL task. When you await
in Consumer()
, then the rest of the Consumer()
method is actually installed as a continuation off of the completion of the Task
returned from Func(int n)
.return
being mapped to a SetResult(...)
call prior to a real return. SetResult(...)
boils down to a call to TaskCompletionSource<>.TrySetResult
.TaskCompletionSource<>.TrySetResult
signals the completion of the TPL task. Instantly enabling its continuations to occur "sometime". This "sometime" may mean on another thread, or in some conditions the TPL is smart and says "um, I might as well just call it now on this same thread".Task
for Func(int n)
becomes technically "Completed" right before the finally gets run. This means that code that was awaiting on an async method may run in parallel threads, or even before the finally block.Considering the overarching Task
is supposed to represent the asynchronous state of the method, fundamentally it shouldn't get flagged as completed until at least all the user-provided code has been executed as per the language design. I'll bring this up with Anders, language design team, and compiler devs to get this looked at.
Scope of Manifestation / Severity:
You typically won't be bit by this as bad in a WPF or WinForms case where you have some sort of managed message loop going on. The reason why is that the await
on Task
implementations defer to the SynchronizationContext
. This causes the async continuations to be queued up on the pre-existing message loop to be run on the same thread. You can verify this by changing your code to run Consumer()
in the following way:
DispatcherFrame frame = new DispatcherFrame(exitWhenRequested: true);
Action asyncAction = async () => {
await Consumer();
frame.Continue = false;
};
Dispatcher.CurrentDispatcher.BeginInvoke(asyncAction);
Dispatcher.PushFrame(frame);
Once run inside the context of the WPF message loop, the output appears as you would expect it:
Consumer: before await #1
Func: Begin #1
Func: End #1
Func: Finally #1
Consumer: after await #1
Consumer: before await #2
Func: Begin #2
Func: End #2
Func: Finally #2
Consumer: after await #2
Consumer: after the loop
After the wait
Workaround:
Alas, the workaround means changing your code to not use return
statements inside a try/finally
block. I know this really means you lose a lot of elegance in your code flow. You can use async helper methods or helper lambdas to work around this. Personally, I prefer the helper-lambdas because it automatically closes over locals/parameters from the containing method, as well as keeps your relevant code closer.
Helper Lambda approach:
static async Task<int> Func( int n )
{
int result;
try
{
Func<Task<int>> helperLambda = async() => {
Console.WriteLine( " Func: Begin #{0}", n );
await TaskEx.Delay( 100 );
Console.WriteLine( " Func: End #{0}", n );
return 0;
};
result = await helperLambda();
}
finally
{
Console.WriteLine( " Func: Finally #{0}", n );
}
// since Func(...)'s return statement is outside the try/finally,
// the finally body is certain to execute first, even in face of this bug.
return result;
}
Helper Method approach:
static async Task<int> Func(int n)
{
int result;
try
{
result = await HelperMethod(n);
}
finally
{
Console.WriteLine(" Func: Finally #{0}", n);
}
// since Func(...)'s return statement is outside the try/finally,
// the finally body is certain to execute first, even in face of this bug.
return result;
}
static async Task<int> HelperMethod(int n)
{
Console.WriteLine(" Func: Begin #{0}", n);
await TaskEx.Delay(100);
Console.WriteLine(" Func: End #{0}", n);
return 0;
}
As a shameless plug: We're hiring in the languages space at Microsoft, and always looking for great talent. Blog entry here with the full list of open positions :)
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With