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

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • 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 7682779
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 31, 20262026-05-31T18:38:49+00:00 2026-05-31T18:38:49+00:00

In a thread resolved yesterday , @hvd showed me how to get control over

  • 0

In a thread resolved yesterday, @hvd showed me how to get “control” over exception handling by .Invoke when dealing with delegates of unknown type (an issue seen in libraries like Isis2, where the end-user provides polymorphic event handlers and the library type-matches to decide which to call). Hvd’s suggestion revolved around knowing how many arguments the upcall handler received and then using that information to construct a generic of the right type, which allowed him to construct a dynamic object and invoke it. The sequence yielded full control over exception handling.

The core of his suggestion was that Isis2 might consider doing upcalls this way:

MethodInfo mi = typeof(Program).GetMethod("Foo", BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.NonPublic); 
Delegate del = Delegate.CreateDelegate(typeof(Action<,>).MakeGenericType(mi.GetParameters().Select(p => p.ParameterType).ToArray()), mi);
((dynamic)del).Invoke(arg0, arg1);

Here’s my question: Can anyone suggest a way to do this same thing that works for an arbitrary number of arguments? Clearly I can do a switch statement and write code for the case of 1 arg, 2, etc. But is there a way to do it where mi.GetParameters().Length tells us how many arguments?

As a capsule summary for those who don’t want to click the link, the core issue is this: when doing these kinds of dynamic upcalls, the end-user (who registered the method being called) may throw an exception due to bugs. Turns out that when not running under Visual Studio — when running directly in the CLR — the C# .Invoke will catch and rethrow exceptions, packaging them as inner exceptions inside a InvocationTargetException. This unwinds the stack and causes the user to perceive the bug as having been some kind of problem with the code that called .Invoke (e.g. with MY code). This is why the C# reference manual argues that catch/rethrow is poor coding practice: one should only catch exceptions that one plans to handle…

hvd explained that this was basically because .Invoke had no clue as to the number or types of the arguments and in that mode, apparently, catchs and rethrows exceptions for some reason. His workaround essentially pins down the number of arguments (the generic in the example: Action<,>) and this apparently is enough so that .Invoke doesn’t do a “universal catch”. But to use his example for arbitrary code, I need a case for each possible number of parameters. Doable (after all, who would ever want more than 16?) but ugly!

Hence today’s challenge: Improve that code so that with a similar 3 line snippet of C# it works no matter how many parameters. Of course the resulting delegate needs to be callable too, presumably with a vector of objects, one per argument…

PS: One reason for pessimism: Action itself comes in 16 forms, with 1 to 16 arguments. So to me this suggests that the C# developers didn’t see a more general way to do it, and ended up with the version that would correspond to me using a switch statement (and I guess the switch would have cases for 0 to 16 arguments, since I would need an Action<…> with N type arguments to handle N user-supplied arguments!)

  • 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
    2026-05-31T18:38:50+00:00Added an answer on May 31, 2026 at 6:38 pm

    I don’t want to leave this open forever, so I’ve done what I could to understand the core issue, including downloading the code for .Invoke in Mono. As far as I can tell, the original problem is simply due to an optimization that favors faster invocations at the cost of catching exceptions this way when a dynamic Invoke is done on an object with an argument vector. The code for a dynamic delegate created using the generic template simply doesn’t have this catch in it.

    Not a great answer but without access to the .NET implementation of Invoke, it apparently won’t be possible to give a better one.

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

Sidebar

Related Questions

This is a followup on a thread I thought was resolved yesterday. Yesterday I
I'm trying to crate my own thread safe event handling but I get E
Had another thread regarding this but it wasn't resolved probably because I wasn't very
This is the error I'm getting: Exception in thread main java.lang.Error: Unresolved compilation problem:
Syntax error on Token Void, @ expected run cannot be resolved to a type
__thread Foo foo; How is foo actually resolved? Does the compiler silently replace every
Thread thread = new Thread(new Runnable() { @Override public void run() { try {
thread.join() will call thread.wait() , but who and when notifies (either with thread.notify() or
Can Thread.Abort interrupt a thread that is sleeping (using, say, Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromDays(40)) ? Or will
This thread didn't helped me. If I use $class_vars = get_class_vars(get_class($this)); foreach ($class_vars as

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.