Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 3989906
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 20, 20262026-05-20T06:25:50+00:00 2026-05-20T06:25:50+00:00

I’m working on a GUI application, which relies heavily on Action<> delegates to customize

  • 0

I’m working on a GUI application, which relies heavily on Action<> delegates to customize behavior of our UI tools. I’m wondering if the way we are doing this has any potential issues, e.g. whether the implementation keeps references to captured variables, class instances that declare the delegates etc?

So let’s say we have this class MapControl, which wraps a stateful GUI control. The map has different kinds of tools (Drawing, Selection, etc.), represented by ITool interface. You can set the tool with StartTool(), but you can only have one tool active at a time, so when another tool is set previous one is stopped using StopTool(). When tool is stopped, a caller-specified callback delegate is executed.

public class MapControl
{
    ITool _currentTool;
    Action<IResult> _onComplete;

    public void StartTool(ToolEnum tool, Action<IResult> onComplete) {

        //If tool is active, stop it first
        if (_currentTool != null) StopTool();

        _onComplete = onComplete;

        //Creates a tool class, etc.
        _currentTool = CreateTool(tool) as ITool;
    }

    public void StopTool() {

        //Execute callback delegate
        IResult result = _currentTool.GetResult();
        if (_onComplete != null)
            _onComplete(result);

        //Nix the references to callback and tool
        _onComplete = null;
        _currentTool = null;
    }
}

In the application’s ViewModel class we set some tool like this:

class ViewModel
{
    private MapControl _mapControl = new MapControl();
    public void SetSomeTool() 
    {
        //These variables will be captured in the closure
        var someClassResource = this.SomeClassResource;
        var someLocalResource = new object();

        //Start tool, specify callback delegate as lambda
        _mapControl.StartTool(ToolEnum.SelectTool, (IResult result) => {

            //Do something with result and the captured variables
            someClassResource.DoSomething(result, someLocalResource);
        });
    }
}

In our case the ViewModel class is attached to the main window of a WPF application, and there can only be one instance of ViewModel during the application lifetime. Would it change anything if this weren’t the case, and the classes which declare the delegates would be more transient?

My question is, am I disposing of the callback delegates correctly? Are there any scenarios, where this can cause memory bloat by holding on to references it shouldn’t?

More generally, what’s the safe and correct way of disposing anonymous delegates?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-20T06:25:50+00:00Added an answer on May 20, 2026 at 6:25 am

    IMHO, it is ok and you are not holding on to any references you don’t need. With clearing the references in StopTool you no longer hold them.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

link Im having trouble converting the html entites into html characters, (&# 8217;) i
I'm parsing an RSS feed that has an &#8217; in it. SimpleXML turns this
We're building an app, our first using Rails 3, and we're having to build
I want use html5's new tag to play a wav file (currently only supported
Seemingly simple, but I cannot find anything relevant on the web. What is the
Does anyone know how can I replace this 2 symbol below from the string
this is what i have right now Drawing an RSS feed into the php,
I'm trying to decode HTML entries from here NYTimes.com and I cannot figure out
That's pretty much it. I'm using Nokogiri to scrape a web page what has
I have just tried to save a simple *.rtf file with some websites and

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.