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 1001557
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 16, 20262026-05-16T07:41:34+00:00 2026-05-16T07:41:34+00:00

Suppose you have an array of 1000 random integer numbers and you need to

  • 0

Suppose you have an array of 1000 random integer numbers and you need to loop over it to find the number 68 for example.

Using the new Parallel.For on a quad core CPU would improve speed considerably, making each core to work only 250 array items.

The question is: is it possible to interrupt the Parallel.For loop when the following condition is met?

if (integerArray[i] == 68)

   break;

Thanks.

  • 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
    2026-05-16T07:41:35+00:00Added an answer on May 16, 2026 at 7:41 am

    If you want to stop after the current executing iteration are done (but iterations before the current WILL be executed – that is, the iterations with a lower index = i)

    Parallel.For(0, 100, (i, s) =>
        {
            s.Break();
        });
    

    or if you want to stop after the current and interations before this (in terms of index = i) should also stop

    Parallel.For(0, 100, (i, s) =>
        {
            s.Stop();
        });
    

    but in BOTH cases it is good practice to check if the work should be aborted if the iteration can take a while

    s.ShouldExitCurrentIteration
    

    read more here Parallel.For Method (Int32, Int32, Action(Int32, ParallelLoopState))

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

Sidebar

Related Questions

No related questions found

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.