DoEvents in C#?

[Tony]

Just starting C# from a VB background.

Is there a C# keyword comparable to the vb keyword DoEvents?

Tony!

[AlexS]

See Application.DoEvents method

HTH
Alex

"Tony" <no**@none.com> wrote in message
news:8g********************************@4ax.com...

Just starting C# from a VB background.

Is there a C# keyword comparable to the vb keyword DoEvents?

Tony!

[Michael Culley]

push ctrl-alt-j and search for doevents, you will find it is Application.DoEvents()

--
Michael Culley
"Tony" <no**@none.com> wrote in message news:8g********************************@4ax.com...

Just starting C# from a VB background.

Is there a C# keyword comparable to the vb keyword DoEvents?

Tony!

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Tony <no**@none.com> wrote:

Just starting C# from a VB background.

Is there a C# keyword comparable to the vb keyword DoEvents?

Others have posted about Application.DoEvents() - but most of the time
when you need to call DoEvents, you should actually be thinking of
using a different thread instead.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Michael Culley]

I don't know if that's really true. If you want your app to be doing only one thing but allow the user to cancel it or just to allow
the GUI to update then doevents is quite suitable.

--
Michael Culley
"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.com> wrote in message news:MP************************@msnews.microsoft.c om...

Tony <no**@none.com> wrote:

Just starting C# from a VB background.

Is there a C# keyword comparable to the vb keyword DoEvents?

Others have posted about Application.DoEvents() - but most of the time
when you need to call DoEvents, you should actually be thinking of
using a different thread instead.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[PseudoBill]

It's now part of the .net framework:

Application.DoEvents();
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Michael Culley <mc*****@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote:

I don't know if that's really true. If you want your app to be doing
only one thing but allow the user to cancel it or just to allow the
GUI to update then doevents is quite suitable.

I'm afraid I disagree - you need to work out where to call DoEvents,
make sure you don't have reentrancy problems etc. I believe it's far
cleaner to start a new thread - it will also make your UI itself
perform better for repaint requests etc, as it won't have to wait for
your next call to DoEvents before repainting.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Miha Markic [MVP C#]]

Hi Michael,

I totally agree with Jon.
DoEvents was good because there was no multithreading with VB<=6.
You really should use Backgroundthread thread instead.

--
Miha Markic [MVP C#] - RightHand .NET consulting & development
miha at rthand com
www.rthand.com

"Michael Culley" <mc*****@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:u6**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

I don't know if that's really true. If you want your app to be doing only one thing but allow the user to cancel it or just to allow the GUI to update then doevents is quite suitable.

--
Michael Culley
"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.com> wrote in message

news:MP************************@msnews.microsoft.c om...

Tony <no**@none.com> wrote:

Just starting C# from a VB background.

Is there a C# keyword comparable to the vb keyword DoEvents?

Others have posted about Application.DoEvents() - but most of the time
when you need to call DoEvents, you should actually be thinking of
using a different thread instead.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]]

Michael,

I'm going to throw my hat in with Jon and Miha as well. DoEvents is not
the way to go. As a matter of fact, I find DoEvents to be downright evil,
and even encouraged MS to take DoEvents off the Application class.
--
- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]
- mv*@spam.guard.caspershouse.com

"Michael Culley" <mc*****@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:u6**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

I don't know if that's really true. If you want your app to be doing only one thing but allow the user to cancel it or just to allow the GUI to update then doevents is quite suitable.

--
Michael Culley
"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.com> wrote in message

news:MP************************@msnews.microsoft.c om...

Tony <no**@none.com> wrote:

Just starting C# from a VB background.

Is there a C# keyword comparable to the vb keyword DoEvents?

Others have posted about Application.DoEvents() - but most of the time
when you need to call DoEvents, you should actually be thinking of
using a different thread instead.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too