// Do not remove this try catch block.

[Lost User]

Hammer. Bigger Hammer. Biggest Hammer. :laugh:

Ah, I see you have the machine that goes ping. This is my favorite. You see we lease it back from the company we sold it to and that way it comes under the monthly current budget and not the capital account.

[PIEBALDconsult]

At least make it catch only null reference exceptions? And let Bob sort out the rest?

[Lost User]

Hmmm, I can infer from this snippet that the filters variable is most likely a CString[^] member variable which is being modified/accessed by multiple threads. Am I right? :) Best Wishes, -David Delaune

[Bernhard Hiller]

I am trying to figure out how that can work. What about

private Something _filters;
private Something filters
{
get
{
if (_filters == null)
{
Task.Run(() => CreateFilters());
}
return _filters;
}
}
private void CreateFilters()
{
// somehow instantiates a Something and sets the _filters member
}

That could cause such a strange behavior, couldn't it? :-D

[KBZX5000]

Just remove the try-catch and stack-trace the exception. I don't see the problem. o7

[Plamen Dragiyski]

I think he might not know what Multi-Threaded Programming is.

[maze3]

OMG that is terrible

try {
Filtering = !filters.IsEmpty;
}
catch(Exception ex) {
// Do not remove this try catch block. For some reason this always throws Null reference exception but then works.
}
finally {
Filtering = !filters.IsEmpty;
}

[kristopher baker]

My guess is that either "filters" isn't instantiated or is getting instantiated at the same time that it is being called. What is happening when "IsEmpty" is called? It might be trying to kick something off when it is called.

[Middle Manager]

I second that request. Can we be shown the IsEmpty code please? Can't be too many company secrets hidden in there... god, please say there isn't! :omg:

[agolddog]

Outside of that... Who knows the context, but I'm going to guess that filters is a private member property, and Filtering is exposed. Why wouldn't someone just make Filtering a public, get-only convenience property then, rather than setting some piece of data, where we now have to maintain two things?

[Bernhard Hiller]

Exactly. But somewhere he read something about lazy initialization, and somewhere else he saw a Task.Run, understood neither of them, and ... Welcome to the wonderful world of code monkeys who've used every programming concept during their career. :^)

[User 11277767]

public bool IsEmpty
{
get {
try {
return _filters.IsEmpty();
}
catch (NullReferenceException e)
{
InstantiateFilters();
throw new NullReferenceException("Try it again now please.");
}
}
}

[Daniel R Przybylski]

Are You A Code Poet? - I'm silently reviewing your code T-Shirt | Teespring[^]

[Leng Vang]

Zombie coder?

[Yusuf]

Nope. filter is ICollectionView [^](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.icollectionview(v=vs.110).aspx) type. It is possible it could be null.

Yusuf May I help you?

[Yusuf]

var filters = Grid.RecordManager.FilteredInDataItems;

it is using 3rd party grid control. It returns ICollectionView [^](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.icollectionview(v=vs.110).aspx)

Yusuf May I help you?

[Yusuf]

bool IsEmpty { get; }

Member of System.ComponentModel.ICollectionView

Yusuf May I help you?

[kristopher baker]

That tells you everything. You're variously trying to call an IsEmpty() method on a null _filters object. The exception is caught, InstantiateFilters() then fills up your filters variable from your calling code. The next time around in the finally it calls on the IsEmpty property again but this time _filters has been instantiated and the 'try' passes without a problem.

[User 11277767]

I'm not the OP so I have no knowledge of the actual code. That was just a stupid joke on my part.