I have a question about how to use Dispose()
and destructors. Reading some articles and the MSDN documentation, this seems to be the recommended way of implementing Dispose()
and destructors.
But I have two questions about this implementation, that you can read below:
class Testing : IDisposable
{
bool _disposed = false;
protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing)
{
if (!_disposed) // only dispose once!
{
if (disposing)
{
// Not in destructor, OK to reference other objects
}
// perform cleanup for this object
}
_disposed = true;
}
public void Dispose()
{
Dispose(true);
// tell the GC not to finalize
GC.SuppressFinalize(this);
}
~Testing()
{
Dispose(false);
}
}
When the programmer uses using
or calls Dispose() explicity, our class is calling to GC.SupressFinalize(this)
. My question here is:
Suppose that the GC is going to clean our object but the programmer did not call Dispose()
What code must be executed in the if inside, and what outside?
if (!_disposed) // only dispose once!
{
if (disposing)
{
//What should I do here and why?
}
// And what here and why?
}
Thanks in advance
It unregisters the object from the finalizer list, ie when the GC later collects the object it will ignore the presence of the destructor. This is a big gain in performance since the destructor would otherwise require the object's collection, and that of everything it references, to be delayed.
You could, but it is certain to be pointless: the object you're in has become unreachable so all those owned managed resources are unreachable too. They will be Finalized and collected by the GC in the same run and calling Dispose() on them is unnecessary but not totally without risk or cost.
2a What code must be executed in the if inside, and what outside?
Inside the if(disposing)
, call _myField.Dispose()
In other words, Dispose of managed resources (objects with a Dispose)
Outside, call code to cleanup (close) unmanaged resources, like Win32API.Close(_myHandle)
.
Note that when you don't have unmanaged resources, as will usually be the case (look up SafeHandle), you don't need a destructor and therefore no SuppressFinalize.
And that makes that the complete (official) implementation of this pattern is only needed because of the possibility that Test is inherited from.
Note that the Dispose(bool)
is protected. When you declare your class Testing to be sealed
, it is totally safe and conforming to omit the ~Testing()
.