Skip to main content

Task.Unwrap() - A useful proxy to avoid inner Task inside a Task

In this post we will talk about Task and what we should do when we end up with 'Task<Task<Foo>>".

Let's start with a simple example. Let's asume that we have an async method.
public async Task<int> DoSomethingAsync()
    return await GetNumberAsync();
We have the 'DoSomethingAsync' method that we need to call inside another task. If we call this method directly we will end up with Task<int>, but if we call this method in another Task than we will end up with...
Task<int> simpleCall = DoSomethingAsync();

Task<Task<int>> complexCall = new Task<Task<int>>(
    async () =>
        return await DoSomethingAsync();
As we can see, to be able to call a async a method in a task we will need to add the 'async' attribute to the lambda expression (function). Because of this we will get a Task of Task (Task<Task<..>) and not a simple Task<...>.

You could say that this is fine, it is not complicated to get the result of the inner task and so on. Yes, this is true, but in the same time we need to be able to handle error from both tasks and cancelation tokens.
For this cases it is recommended to use "Task.Unwrap" method, that allow us to work directly with Task<...>.
Task<int> simpleCall = DoSomethingAsync();

Task<Task<int>> complexCall = new Task<Task<int>>(
    async () =>
        return await DoSomethingAsync();
Task<int> complexCallUnwrap = complexCall.Unwrap();
There is no magic behind 'Unwrap' method. You can use with success in cases when you have Task<Task<Task<...>,  also.
Behind the scene, 'Unwrap' method creates a proxy that will handle all complex cases for us. We don't need to forward the cancelation token, to check errors at different level. We can work as we would have a simple task, not a task inside another tasks.
The Task that is returned by 'Unwrap' includes all the cancelation token request and exception handling (the proxy is doing the job of connecting the task with inner task).

Another use case when 'Unwrap' is useful is in the moment when we want to create a continue action using 'ContinueWith' method. Without 'Unwrap' method we can end up easily in cases where we have inner Task inside a task. This can be avoided using 'Unwrap'.
Task<Task<int>> taskInTask = DoSomethingAsync()
                                .ContinueWith((value) => DoSomethingAsync());
Task<int> taskInTaskWithUnwrap = DoSomethingAsync()
                                            .ContinueWith((value) => DoSomethingAsync())

Using 'Unwrap' method we can work directly with a proxy, that represents the entire Task<Task>, like a simple Task.


Popular posts from this blog

How to check in AngularJS if a service was register or not

There are cases when you need to check in a service or a controller was register in AngularJS.
For example a valid use case is when you have the same implementation running on multiple application. In this case, you may want to intercept the HTTP provider and add a custom step there. This step don’t needs to run on all the application, only in the one where the service exist and register.
A solution for this case would be to have a flag in the configuration that specify this. In the core you would have an IF that would check the value of this flag.
Another solution is to check if a specific service was register in AngularJS or not. If the service was register that you would execute your own logic.
To check if a service was register or not in AngularJS container you need to call the ‘has’ method of ‘inhector’. It will return TRUE if the service was register.
if ($injector.has('httpInterceptorService')) { $httpProvider.interceptors.push('httpInterceptorService&#…

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine:
threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration:

TeamCity.NET 4.51EF 6.0.2VS2013
It seems that there …

Entity Framework (EF) TransactionScope vs Database.BeginTransaction

In today blog post we will talk a little about a new feature that is available on EF6+ related to Transactions.
Until now, when we had to use transaction we used ‘TransactionScope’. It works great and I would say that is something that is now in our blood.
using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required)) { using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("...")) { conn.Open(); SqlCommand sqlCommand = new SqlCommand(); sqlCommand.Connection = conn; sqlCommand.CommandText = ... sqlCommand.ExecuteNonQuery(); ... } scope.Complete(); } Starting with EF6.0 we have a new way to work with transactions. The new approach is based on Database.BeginTransaction(), Database.Rollback(), Database.Commit(). Yes, no more TransactionScope.
In the followi…