Should I call Close() or Dispose() for stream objects?

C#StreamIdisposableStreamreaderStreamwriter

C# Problem Overview


Classes such as Stream, StreamReader, StreamWriter etc implements IDisposable interface. That means, we can call Dispose() method on objects of these classes. They've also defined a public method called Close(). Now that confuses me, as to what should I call once I'm done with objects? What if I call both?

My current code is this:

using (Stream responseStream = response.GetResponseStream())
{
   using (StreamReader reader = new StreamReader(responseStream))
   {
      using (StreamWriter writer = new StreamWriter(filename))
      {
         int chunkSize = 1024;
         while (!reader.EndOfStream)
         {
            char[] buffer = new char[chunkSize];
            int count = reader.Read(buffer, 0, chunkSize);
            if (count != 0)
            {
               writer.Write(buffer, 0, count);
            }
         }
         writer.Close();
      }
      reader.Close();
   }
}

As you see, I've written using() constructs, which automatically call Dispose() method on each object. But I also call Close() methods. Is it right?

Please suggest me the best practices when using stream objects. :-)

MSDN example doesn't use using() constructs, and call Close() method:

Is it good?

C# Solutions


Solution 1 - C#

A quick jump into Reflector.NET shows that the Close() method on StreamWriter is:

public override void Close()
{
    this.Dispose(true);
    GC.SuppressFinalize(this);
}

And StreamReader is:

public override void Close()
{
    this.Dispose(true);
}

The Dispose(bool disposing) override in StreamReader is:

protected override void Dispose(bool disposing)
{
    try
    {
        if ((this.Closable && disposing) && (this.stream != null))
        {
            this.stream.Close();
        }
    }
    finally
    {
        if (this.Closable && (this.stream != null))
        {
            this.stream = null;
            /* deleted for brevity */
            base.Dispose(disposing);
        }
    }
}

The StreamWriter method is similar.

So, reading the code it is clear that that you can call Close() & Dispose() on streams as often as you like and in any order. It won't change the behaviour in any way.

So it comes down to whether or not it is more readable to use Dispose(), Close() and/or using ( ... ) { ... }.

My personal preference is that using ( ... ) { ... } should always be used when possible as it helps you to "not run with scissors".

But, while this helps correctness, it does reduce readability. In C# we already have plethora of closing curly braces so how do we know which one actually performs the close on the stream?

So I think it is best to do this:

using (var stream = ...)
{
	/* code */

	stream.Close();
}

It doesn't affect the behaviour of the code, but it does aid readability.

Solution 2 - C#

No, you shouldn't call those methods manually. At the end of the using block the Dispose() method is automatically called which will take care to free unmanaged resources (at least for standard .NET BCL classes such as streams, readers/writers, ...). So you could also write your code like this:

using (Stream responseStream = response.GetResponseStream())
    using (StreamReader reader = new StreamReader(responseStream))
        using (StreamWriter writer = new StreamWriter(filename))
        {
            int chunkSize = 1024;
            while (!reader.EndOfStream)
            {
                 char[] buffer = new char[chunkSize];
                 int count = reader.Read(buffer, 0, chunkSize);
                 if (count != 0)
                 {
                     writer.Write(buffer, 0, count);
                 }
            }
         }

The Close() method calls Dispose().

Solution 3 - C#

The documentation says that these two methods are equivalent:

> StreamReader.Close: This implementation of Close calls the Dispose method passing a true value.

> StreamWriter.Close: This implementation of Close calls the Dispose method passing a true value.

> Stream.Close: This method calls Dispose, specifying true to release all resources.

So, both of these are equally valid:

/* Option 1, implicitly calling Dispose */
using (StreamWriter writer = new StreamWriter(filename)) { 
   // do something
} 

/* Option 2, explicitly calling Close */
StreamWriter writer = new StreamWriter(filename)
try {
    // do something
}
finally {
    writer.Close();
}

Personally, I would stick with the first option, since it contains less "noise".

Solution 4 - C#

This is an old question, but you can now write using statements without needing to block each one. They will be disposed of in reverse order when the containing block is finished.

using var responseStream = response.GetResponseStream();
using var reader = new StreamReader(responseStream);
using var writer = new StreamWriter(filename);

int chunkSize = 1024;
while (!reader.EndOfStream)
{
    char[] buffer = new char[chunkSize];
    int count = reader.Read(buffer, 0, chunkSize);
    if (count != 0)
    {
        writer.Write(buffer, 0, count);
    }
}

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/language-reference/proposals/csharp-8.0/using

Solution 5 - C#

For what it's worth, the source code for Stream.Close explains why there are two methods:

> > // Stream used to require that all cleanup logic went into Close(), > // which was thought up before we invented IDisposable. However, we > // need to follow the IDisposable pattern so that users can write > // sensible subclasses without needing to inspect all their base > // classes, and without worrying about version brittleness, from a > // base class switching to the Dispose pattern. We're moving > // Stream to the Dispose(bool) pattern - that's where all subclasses > // should put their cleanup now. >

In short, Close is only there because it predates Dispose, and it can't be deleted for compatibility reasons.

Solution 6 - C#

On many classes which support both Close() and Dispose() methods, the two calls would be equivalent. On some classes, however, it is possible to re-open an object which has been closed. Some such classes may keep some resources alive after a Close, in order to permit reopening; others may not keep any resources alive on Close(), but might set a flag on Dispose() to explicitly forbid re-opening.

The contract for IDisposable.Dispose explicitly requires that calling it on an object which will never be used again will be at worst harmless, so I would recommend calling either IDisposable.Dispose or a method called Dispose() on every IDisposable object, whether or not one also calls Close().

Attributions

All content for this solution is sourced from the original question on Stackoverflow.

The content on this page is licensed under the Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license.

Content TypeOriginal AuthorOriginal Content on Stackoverflow
QuestionNawazView Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - C#EnigmativityView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - C#Darin DimitrovView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 3 - C#HeinziView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 4 - C#Todd SkeltonView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 5 - C#Joe AmentaView Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 6 - C#supercatView Answer on Stackoverflow