Questions tagged [idisposable]

IDisposable is an interface within the Microsoft .NET Framework's Base Class Library (BCL). It is intended to provide a generic, deterministic method of releasing unmanaged resources within .NET application code.

Purpose

IDisposable is an interface within the Microsoft .NET Framework's Base Class Library (BCL). It is intended to provide a generic, deterministic method of releasing unmanaged resources within .NET application code.

Unmanaged Resources

A managed resource is any object in memory that, in its entirety, can be monitored and released by the .NET garbage collector when they are no longer needed. The vast majority of types available within the .NET libraries (as well as user-defined types) represent managed resources. Because these are managed resources, it is not necessary to release the memory that these objects require; once they are no longer in use, the .NET garbage collector will periodically "collect" these objects and free this memory for other uses.

An unmanaged resource is any resource (typically something existing outside of the application runtime, such as a file handle or database connection) which is not--and cannot be--monitored and released by the .NET runtime garbage collector. Typical examples of unmanaged resources are network connections, file handles, and Windows GDI graphics handles. All of these resources, while represented in .NET code by a traditional object, are outside of the reach of the .NET garbage collector, as the procedure for obtaining and releasing such resources are specific to the type of resource, and all require calls into unmanaged code.

IDisposable

IDisposable is an interface within the BCL that defines a single parameterless, non-returning function called Dispose. A type that implements this interface indicates to the developer that, at some level of encapsulation, this type utilizes an unmanaged resource of some kind. In this case, the developer is required to call Dispose on the instance once it is no longer needed. The underlying type's implementation of Dispose should then perform whatever actions are necessary to release the resource, including calling unmanaged code.

Use Cases

There are two* (by design) cases in which a type should implement IDisposable:

  1. The type interacts directly with an unmanaged resource (it calls an unmanaged or external function to acquire a resource, and another unmanaged or external function to release it).
  2. The type makes use of an unmanaged resource indirectly through other types that implement IDisposable. In other words, the type makes use of an unmanaged resource that is not managed by another instance and exists beyond the lifetime of a single function call.

In the first case, the use is obvious: the type makes use of the resource directly, so it must acquire and release the resource directly. In the second case, the type makes use of other IDisposable types and must be told when it is safe to call Dispose on those resources.

*A type may also implement IDisposable in order to take advantage of the using language constructs within VB.NET and C#, but this choice is generally made for aesthetic or idiomatic reasons, not out of technical applicability, so those cases fall outside the scope of this article.

Implementation

Depending on the reason that a type implements the IDisposable interface, the implementation may vary slightly. There are, in general, two forms of implementation of IDisposable:

  1. Simple, strict implementation of the interface (a single Dispose function)
  2. Finalizer-compatible implementation (two versions of Dispose)

Simple

If the type falls into the second use-case outlined above (indirect use of an unmanaged resource purely by encapsulation), then the first implementation should be used. An example appears below:

public class WidgetFile : IDisposable
{
    private FileStream fileStream;

    public WidgetFile(string fileName)
    {
        fileStream = new FileStream(fileName, FileMode.Open);
    }

    public void Dispose()
    {
        fileStream.Dispose();
    }
}

In this case, the WidgetFile encapsulates an IDisposable type, System.IO.FileStream. Since the type (and its parent type(s)) only indirectly interact with an unmanaged resource, the simple implementation is both adequate and preferred.

Finalizer-Based

If, however, the type (or one of its parent types) interacts directly with an unmanaged resource, then a more defensive, finalizer-based approach is required:

[DllImport("Widget.dll")]
private static extern IntPtr GetGadgetHandle(string fileName);
[DllImport("Widget.dll")]
private static extern void ReleaseGadgetHandle(IntPtr handle);

public class SuperWidgetFile : IDisposable
{
    private IntPtr handle;
    private WidgetFile file;

    public SuperWidgetFile(string fileName)
    {
        handle = GetGadgetHandle(fileName);
        file = new WidgetFile(fileName);
    }

    public void Dispose()
    {
        Dispose(true);
    }

    ~SuperWidgetFile()
    {
        Dispose(false);
    }

    protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing)
    {
        if(disposing)
        {
            file.Dispose();
            GC.SuppressFinalize(this);
        }

        if(handle != IntPtr.Zero)
        {
            ReleaseGadgetHandle(handle);
            handle = IntPtr.Zero;
        }
    }
}

This implementation is obviously more complex than the simple, strict interface implementation. This is because, while a conscientious developer will always call Dispose on an instance of an IDisposable type when it is no longer needed, mistakes do happen and there is the possibility that the object may be unused but not have Dispose called. In this case, the instance itself (since it is a managed resource) will be collected by the garbage collector, while the unmanaged resource it refers to will never be released explicitly.

However, the garbage collector provides the ability to write code that executes before an object is collected and destroyed, called a "finalizer". The function defined as ~SuperWidgetFile() is the finalizer for the SuperWidgetFile type.

When using this approach, the implementing class must:

  1. Provide a protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) function
  2. Implement the interface and provide a Dispose() function, which calls Dispose(true)
  3. Create a finalizer which calls Dispose(false)

The boolean disposing parameter is designed to designate the source of the function call. If it came from an explicit disposal (the desired path), then it should evaluate to true. If it came from the finalizer, then it should evaluate to false. This is because, as we have done, all IDisposable types that interact with unmanaged resources directly must use the finalizer approach, and these objects may have been collected already. Because of this, the type should only perform the release of its own unmanaged resources within the finalizer.

If the object is disposed explicitly (disposing == true), the type calls GC.SuppressFinalize(this), which tells the garbage collector that this object's finalizer does not need to be called when it is collected.

Common Questions

Q: Are IDisposable types "special"? Does the .NET runtime or garbage collector treat them differently by automatically calling Dispose, collecting them early, etc.?

A: NO. Fundamentally, IDiposable is just an interface, no different from any other interface defined in the .NET libraries or in user code. At runtime, objects implementing IDisposable follow exactly the same rules for collection as all other objects. The only "special treatment" afforded IDisposable types exist at the language level, where language shorthand allow for greater ease in remembering to call Dispose, such as within the using constructs in VB.NET and C#. Again, these are language features only. They do not have any impact on runtime behavior.

Q: Do I always need to call Dispose?

A: YES. While you may have personal knowledge of a particular type and what it actually does when Dispose is called, there should be a very clear, well-defined, and unavoidable reason to avoid calling Dispose when an object is no longer in use. The absolute easiest method of ensuring that you properly dispose of your disposable objects is to enclose them in using blocks:

using(SuperWidgetFile file = new SuperWidgetFile(@"C:\widget.wgt"))
{
    // widget code
}

However, this construct only works when the lifetime of the instance begins and ends within a single function call; in other cases, you will have to ensure that you call Dispose explicitly.

1420 questions
83
votes
2 answers

Should HttpClient instances created by HttpClientFactory be disposed?

So, I've registered a named client with the services collection in my Startup.cs: services.AddHttpClient(someServiceName, client => client.BaseAddress = baseAddress); and now can inject an IHttpClientFactory from my service…
77
votes
6 answers

Entity Framework and calling context.dispose()

When should one call DbContext.dispose() with entity framework? Is this imaginary method bad? public static string GetName(string userId) { var context = new DomainDbContext(); var userName = context.UserNameItems.FirstOrDefault(x =>…
Sindre
  • 3,880
  • 2
  • 26
  • 39
71
votes
3 answers

Duck typing in the C# compiler

Note This is not a question about how to implement or emulate duck typing in C#... For several years I was under the impression that certain C# language features were depdendent on data structures defined in the language itself (which always seemed…
MattDavey
  • 8,897
  • 3
  • 31
  • 54
68
votes
15 answers

Should "Dispose" only be used for types containing unmanaged resources?

I was having a discussion with a colleague recently about the value of Dispose and types that implement IDisposable. I think there is value in implementing IDisposable for types that should clean up as soon as possible, even if there are no…
Steve Dunn
  • 21,044
  • 11
  • 62
  • 87
66
votes
5 answers

When or if to Dispose HttpResponseMessage when calling ReadAsStreamAsync?

I am using the System.Net.Http.HttpClient to do some client-side HTTP communication. I've got all of the HTTP in one spot, abstracted away from the rest of the code. In one instance I want to read the response content as a stream, but the consumer…
dkackman
  • 15,179
  • 13
  • 69
  • 123
66
votes
7 answers

Declare IDisposable for the class or interface?

Starting from the following situation: public interface ISample { } public class SampleA : ISample { // has some (unmanaged) resources that needs to be disposed } public class SampleB : ISample { // has no resources that needs to be…
Beachwalker
  • 7,685
  • 6
  • 52
  • 94
64
votes
4 answers

Is IDisposable.Dispose() called automatically?

Possible Duplicate: Will the Garbage Collector call IDisposable.Dispose for me? I have a Class which has some unmanaged resources. My class implements the IDisposable interface and releases the unmanaged resources in the Dispose() method. Do I…
Padeep
  • 641
  • 1
  • 5
  • 3
62
votes
5 answers

Who should call Dispose on IDisposable objects when passed into another object?

Is there any guidance or best practices around who should call Dispose() on disposable objects when they have been passed into another object's methods or constuctor? Here's a couple of examples as to what I mean. IDisposable object is passed into a…
Jon Mitchell
  • 3,349
  • 5
  • 27
  • 37
61
votes
2 answers

Does foreach automatically call Dispose?

In C#, Does foreach automatically call Dispose on any object implementing IDisposable? http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa664754(v=vs.71).aspx seems to indicate that it does: *Otherwise, the collection expression is of a type that implements…
jim
  • 613
  • 1
  • 5
  • 4
61
votes
9 answers

Using statement vs. IDisposable.Dispose()

It has been my understanding that the using statement in .NET calls an IDisposable object's Dispose() method once the code exits the block. Does the using statement do anything else? If not, it would seem that the following two code samples achieve…
oscilatingcretin
  • 10,457
  • 39
  • 119
  • 206
60
votes
11 answers

Is there any benefit to implementing IDisposable on classes which do not have resources?

In C#, if a class, such as a manager class, does not have resources, is there any benefit to having it : IDisposable? Simple example: public interface IBoxManager { int addBox(Box b); } public class BoxManager : IBoxManager { public int…
Travis J
  • 81,153
  • 41
  • 202
  • 273
59
votes
9 answers

Using IDisposable to unsubscribe events

I have a class that handles events from a WinForms control. Based on what the user is doing, I am deferencing one instance of the class and creating a new one to handle the same event. I need to unsubscribe the old instance from the event first -…
Jon B
  • 51,025
  • 31
  • 133
  • 161
58
votes
4 answers

Should IDisposable.Dispose() be made safe to call multiple times?

Should implementations of IDisposable make Dispose() safe to call multiple times? Or the opposite? What approach to most .NET Framework classes take? Specifically, is it safe to call System.Data.Linq.DataContext.Dispose() multiple times? The reason…
Jake Petroules
  • 23,472
  • 35
  • 144
  • 225
58
votes
3 answers

What should be passed as the objectName when throwing an ObjectDisposedException?

When implementing IDisposable, I undertand that every method that shouldn't be called after the object's been disposed should throw the ObjectDisposedException. But what is the standard for the name object that should be passed to the exception's…
Wilhelm
  • 1,868
  • 14
  • 21
57
votes
8 answers

Should you implement IDisposable.Dispose() so that it never throws?

For the equivalent mechanism in C++ (the destructor), the advice is that it should usually not throw any exceptions. This is mainly because by doing so you might terminate your process, which is only very rarely a good strategy. In the equivalent…
user49572
1
2
3
94 95