How to detect that CLR stops a background thread

Asked Feb 19 '20 at 14:37

Active Feb 19 '20 at 14:37

Viewed 104 times

When all foreground threads are gone, CLR stops the background threads. That can be read a lot. But what I want to know is how the background thread or the application can detect this situation.

Why? I consider it a bad style to let background threads be killed automatically by some CLR magic, so I normally write code to ensure that a thread gets terminated in a ordered way. But failing to do so, would hang the application in the process of being terminated. So I am considering to mark my worker threads as "background", to avoid the hang, but I still want to know that it happens, so that I can fix that bug.

Is there some equivalent to a ThreadAbortException that I can catch in the thread main method or some handler I can register?

asked Feb 19 '20 at 14:37

Stefan Bormann

Use a background worker and capture the end event. – jdweng Feb 19 '20 at 14:42
How do I "capture the end event"??? – Stefan Bormann Feb 19 '20 at 14:43
It is "rude abort", no notification provided. If you properly tell worker threads to terminate and wait for them to oblige then it doesn't matter if it is a foreground or background thread. Deadlock is a bug you shouldn't try to hide. – Hans Passant Feb 19 '20 at 14:46
Yea, "avoiding to hide" is the purpose of my question... – Stefan Bormann Feb 19 '20 at 14:49
See : https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.componentmodel.backgroundworker.runworkercompleted?view=netframework-4.8 – jdweng Feb 19 '20 at 15:00
Implement IDisposable interface maybe ? And override the Dispose() method ? – SunPaz Feb 19 '20 at 15:00

How to detect that CLR stops a background thread

0 Answers0