Outlining Three System Timers
I have seen a few samples of code involving the three timer classes provided with the .Net framework over the years. Juval has such a sample, which he is updating to use
. I decided to put together a table that outlines the characteristics of all three.
<code>. Even within the MSDN documentation, however, I have never seen much guidance between when to use </code>
<code> and </code>
|Support for adding and removing listeners after the timer is instantiated.||Yes||No||Yes|
|Supports call backs on the user-interface thread||Yes||No||Yes|
|Calls back from threads obtained from the thread pool||Yes||Yes||No|
|Supports drag-and-drop in the Windows Forms Designer||Yes||No||Yes|
|Suitable for running in a server multi-threaded environment||Yes||Yes||No|
|Includes support for passing arbitrary state from the timer initialization to the callback.||No||Yes||No|
|Supports one-off callbacks as well as periodic repeating callbacks||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Accessible across application domain boundaries||Yes||Yes||Yes|
|Supports IComponent â€“ hostable in an IContainer||Yes||No||Yes|
by default, simply because it is a slightly lighter weight implementation.
<code> is a relatively obvious choice for user interface programming. Choosing between the other two options is less obvious and generally the choice between the two is insignificant. If hosting within an </code>
<code> is necessary then obviously </code>
<code> is the right choice. However, if no specific </code>
<code> feature is required, then I suggest choosing </code>
UPDATE – October 5, 2005
Thanks to Stephen Toub for pointing out that
, there is support for calling back on the UI thread.
<code> can be used in the Windows Forms designer (although it does not appear in the toolbox by default) and that, using </code>
<code>, on </code>
Thanks, exactly what I was looking for.