How does one tell if an IDisposable object reference is disposed?

when dispose method is called in c#
how to check if object is disposed
unity check if disposed
vb net check object disposed
c# using dispose
check if httpclient is disposed c#
c# dispose
c# idisposable

Is there a method, or some other light-weight way, to check if a reference is to a disposed object?

P.S. - This is just a curiousity (sleep well, not in production code). Yes, I know I can catch the ObjectDisposedException upon trying to access a member of the object.

No - default implementation of IDisposable pattern does not support it

IDisposable.Dispose Method (System), As I mentioned before, you cannot reliably use subobjects if your Dispose that all object references are off limits inside the Dispose method that is called by the There's no reason you cannot use objects that you know to be alive and well. The Dispose method is required to perform whatever cleanup will be required before an object is abandoned; if no cleanup is required, it is not required to do anything. Requiring an object to keep track of whether it has been disposed, even when the Dispose method would otherwise do nothing, would require many IDisposable objects to add a flag for very limited benefit.

System.Windows.Forms.Control has an IsDisposed property which is set to true after Dispose() is called. In your own IDisposable objects, you can easily create a similar property.

How to check if object has been disposed in C# [duplicate], 'IDisposable implementation Protected Overridable Sub Dispose(ByVal End If '​If using objects that you know do still exist, such as objects 'that that all object references are off limits inside the Dispose method that is called by the finalizer. Which won’t work if the other code created the instance. Then you’ll have to do something desperate like using Reflection to get the value of the private m_CleanedUp member. Or catch the exception. Frankly, none is this is likely to come to a very good end. You really did want to write to the TCP port.

There is nothing built in that will allow this. You would need to expose an IsDisposed boolean property that reflects an internal disposed flag.

public class SimpleCleanup : IDisposable
    private bool disposed = false;

    public bool IsDisposed
          return disposed;

    public SimpleCleanup()
        this.handle = /*...*/;

    protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing)
        if (!disposed)
            if (disposing)
               // free only managed resources here

            // free unmanaged resources here
            disposed = true;

    public void Dispose()

Accelerated C# 2010, If you are new to interface-based programming, Chapter 9 will take you it manually calls Dispose() before allowing the object reference to drop out of scope. As you probably know the Dispose method is not called when the garbage collector collects the object which implements IDisposable interface. But the GC will call the Finalize method also known as finalizer. In it you should write your cleanup logic using Dispose Pattern. And yes, the .Net Framework will try to run all finalizers, but there is no guaranty that they ever be executed.

If it is not your class and it doesn't provide an IsDisposed property (or something similar - the name is just a convention), then you have no way of knowing.

But if it is your class and you are following the canonical IDisposable implementation, then just expose the _disposed or _isDisposed field as a property and check that.

Accelerated VB 2008, If a type implements the IDisposable interface, you should always call the Dispose method on an instance of the class when you are done using  An simple way to get a list of types that implement IDisposable is to crack open Reflector, navigate to System.IDisposable, expand the node, and then expand the 'Derived Types' node. To be sure that your list is complete, verify that all the assemblies you're using have been 'Open'ed in Reflector.

The Dispose method is required to perform whatever cleanup will be required before an object is abandoned; if no cleanup is required, it is not required to do anything. Requiring an object to keep track of whether it has been disposed, even when the Dispose method would otherwise do nothing, would require many IDisposable objects to add a flag for very limited benefit.

It might have been helpful if IDisposable included two properties--one which indicated whether an object needed disposing, and one of which indicated that the object had not been rendered useless by disposal. For objects where disposal actually does something, both values would be initially true, and would become false after Dispose. For objects where disposal doesn't need to do any cleanup, the first method could always return false and the second one always true, without having to store a flag anywhere. I don't think there's any way those can be added to .NET now, though.

Pro VB 2005 and the .NET 2.0 Platform, Indeed, lifetime is often not deterministic, though it may be, notably if reference counting is used. Indeed, in some cases there is no guarantee that objects will ever  The using statement in C# and the Using statement in Visual Basic simplify the code that you must write to create and clean up an object. The using statement obtains one or more resources, executes the statements that you specify, and automatically disposes of the object.

941 – Checking to See If Objects Are Disposable, This means that, if the user forgets to dispose the object correctly, the references on the Disposable Pattern, you can also check Dispose  If you do not use using, the object will not be automatically disposed when it goes out of scope - it will be up to the object finalizer, if it has one, to get rid of resources when it is garbage collected. using (SqlDataReader aReader = aCommand.ExecuteReader()) { // do stuff } // aReader.Dispose() called here

Dispose pattern, When you are working with hierarchies of objects, you sometimes run into situations Not only will you need to dispose of that object, but you likely will need to walk the of as well unless items of child collections are considered as references. objects will now have their Dispose() method called automatically when the  Is there a method to check if object has been disposed different then try { myObj.CallRandomMethod(); } catch (ObjectDisposedException e) { // now I know object has been disposed } In my case I’m using TcpClient class that has Close() method which disposes object and this can happen in piece of code I don’t have control of.

The IDisposable Pattern explained, The reliable solution is catching the ObjectDisposedException. The solution to write your overridden implementation of the Dispose method doesn't work, since there is a race condition between the thread calling Dispose method and the one accessing to the object: after having checked the hypothetic IsDisposed property , the object could be really disposed, throwing the exception all the same.

  • Dunno. It seems curious that there isn't an bool IsDisposed { get; } declaration on System.IDisposable.
  • @nicodemus13: The Dispose method directs an object to release any and all resources it has acquired but not yet released. If an object never holds resources, its Dispose method generally won't have to do anything; if the type declares void IDisposable.Dispose() {}; it can otherwise ignore IDisposable with no per-instance overhead. An IsDisposed property which was expected to become true following any Dispose call would necessitate adding an otherwise-unnecessary Boolean flag to every instance of many types that could otherwise ignore Dispose.
  • But, wherever you call a method on an object that implements IDisposable, how can you check whether it's been disposed of first? Rather than assuming it isn't and catching an exception? Or somehow you're meant to manage the lifetime so that you should always know whether it's disposed or not?
  • @nicodemus13: One should generally not use an object without knowing that it hasn't been and won't be disposed except in cases where one is prepared to regard disposal of the object by outside code as a signal to abort any pending actions with it. An IsDisposed flag may help prevent code from wasting time on operations that can't possibly succeed, but one would still need to handle an exceptions in the case an object gets disposed between the IsDisposed check and the attempt to use it.
  • WeakReference seems relevant here. It's not exactly an IDipose'd detector, but it does tell you if it's GC'd
  • The OP was looking to see if there is a similar property already on objects that he is not creating. This would be a good idea for objects we create, but most disposable classes in .NET do not follow this convention. Dandikas' answer is correct.
  • @krillgar, there's nothing in the OP's question that supports your assertion.
  • BTW, if one starts using this pattern, it helps to define a new interface (IDisposablePlus or whatever) that inherits from IDisposable and includes bool IsDisposed { get; }. This makes it easy to know which of your IDisposable objects support IsDisposed.
  • I don't think you can inherit an interface because of how C# works. Placing an interface after a colon inherits it. I expect it would implement the interface on the other.
  • IMHO, two flags is overkill. I think it is better to stick with the usual paradigm, where one has a single flag once Dispose has been called on an object. Otherwise you add complexity, merely to know that certain objects "are still useful" even though Dispose has been called on them. Its not worth going down that road.
  • @ToolmakerSteve: There would be generally zero or one flags. For objects that require disposal, the "needs disposing" and "is useful" properties would yield "true/true" prior to dispose and "false/false" afterward, but for objects where disposal would be a no-op, both would unconditionally return "false/true". Saying that an object still needs disposing when it never does, or that an object isn't useful when it always is, would be rather icky. I suppose another approach would be to use an enumerated type to indicate whether a type needs disposing, has been disposed, or simply doesn't care.
  • @ToolmakerSteve: I think the big reason IDisposable doesn't have a Disposed property is that it would have been perceived as odd to have objects where calling Dispose wouldn't set such a property to true, but requiring that objects keep track of whether Dispose was called in cases where they would otherwise have no reason to care would add significant cost and little benefit.
  • Good to know. Specifically, Disposed event is a member of System.ComponentModel.IComponent interface.