Note that any IDisposable implementation should follow the below pattern (IMHO). I developed this pattern based on info from several excellent .NET "gods" the .NET Framework Design Guidelines (note that MSDN does not follow this for some reason!). The .NET Framework Design Guidelines were written by Krzysztof Cwalina (CLR Architect at the time) and Brad Abrams (I believe the CLR Program Manager at the time) and Bill Wagner ([Effective C#] and [More Effective C#] (just take a look for these on Amazon.com:

Note that you should NEVER implement a Finalizer unless your class directly contains (not inherits) UNmanaged resources. Once you implement a Finalizer in a class, even if it is never called, it is guaranteed to live for an extra collection. It is automatically placed on the Finalization Queue (which runs on a single thread). Also, one very important note...all code executed within a Finalizer (should you need to implement one) MUST be thread-safe AND exception-safe! BAD things will happen otherwise...(i.e. undetermined behavior and in the case of an exception, a fatal unrecoverable application crash).

我把模式放在一起(并为其编写了代码片段)如下:

#region IDisposable implementation

//TODO remember to make this class inherit from IDisposable -> $className$ : IDisposable

// Default initialization for a bool is 'false'
private bool IsDisposed { get; set; }

/// <summary>
/// Implementation of Dispose according to .NET Framework Design Guidelines.
/// </summary>
/// <remarks>Do not make this method virtual.
/// A derived class should not be able to override this method.
/// </remarks>
public void Dispose()
{
    Dispose( true );

    // This object will be cleaned up by the Dispose method.
    // Therefore, you should call GC.SupressFinalize to
    // take this object off the finalization queue 
    // and prevent finalization code for this object
    // from executing a second time.

    // Always use SuppressFinalize() in case a subclass
    // of this type implements a finalizer.
    GC.SuppressFinalize( this );
}

/// <summary>
/// Overloaded Implementation of Dispose.
/// </summary>
/// <param name="isDisposing"></param>
/// <remarks>
/// <para><list type="bulleted">Dispose(bool isDisposing) executes in two distinct scenarios.
/// <item>If <paramref name="isDisposing"/> equals true, the method has been called directly
/// or indirectly by a user's code. Managed and unmanaged resources
/// can be disposed.</item>
/// <item>If <paramref name="isDisposing"/> equals false, the method has been called by the 
/// runtime from inside the finalizer and you should not reference 
/// other objects. Only unmanaged resources can be disposed.</item></list></para>
/// </remarks>
protected virtual void Dispose( bool isDisposing )
{
    // TODO If you need thread safety, use a lock around these 
    // operations, as well as in your methods that use the resource.
    try
    {
        if( !this.IsDisposed )
        {
            if( isDisposing )
            {
                // TODO Release all managed resources here

                $end$
            }

            // TODO Release all unmanaged resources here



            // TODO explicitly set root references to null to expressly tell the GarbageCollector
            // that the resources have been disposed of and its ok to release the memory allocated for them.


        }
    }
    finally
    {
        // explicitly call the base class Dispose implementation
        base.Dispose( isDisposing );

        this.IsDisposed = true;
    }
}

//TODO Uncomment this code if this class will contain members which are UNmanaged
// 
///// <summary>Finalizer for $className$</summary>
///// <remarks>This finalizer will run only if the Dispose method does not get called.
///// It gives your base class the opportunity to finalize.
///// DO NOT provide finalizers in types derived from this class.
///// All code executed within a Finalizer MUST be thread-safe!</remarks>
//  ~$className$()
//  {
//     Dispose( false );
//  }
#endregion IDisposable implementation

下面是在派生类中实现IDisposable的代码。注意，您不需要在派生类的定义中显式地列出来自IDisposable的继承。

public DerivedClass : BaseClass, IDisposable (remove the IDisposable because it is inherited from BaseClass)


protected override void Dispose( bool isDisposing )
{
    try
    {
        if ( !this.IsDisposed )
        {
            if ( isDisposing )
            {
                // Release all managed resources here

            }
        }
    }
    finally
    {
        // explicitly call the base class Dispose implementation
        base.Dispose( isDisposing );
    }
}

我已经在我的博客上发布了这个实现:如何正确地实现Dispose模式

没有人回答你是否应该实现IDisposable的问题，即使你不需要它。

简单的回答:不

长一点的回答:

这将允许你的类的消费者使用“using”。我想问的问题是，他们为什么要这么做?大多数开发者不会使用“使用”，除非他们知道他们必须这么做——他们是怎么知道的。要么

很明显，从经验来看(例如，一个套接字类) 它的记录 他们很谨慎，可以看到类实现了IDisposable

因此，通过实现IDisposable，你可以告诉开发人员(至少是一些开发人员)这个类封装了一些必须发布的东西。他们会使用“using”——但在其他情况下，使用是不可能的(对象的作用域不是本地的);他们将不得不开始担心在其他情况下对象的生命周期-我肯定会担心。但这是不必要的

你实现Idisposable，让他们使用使用，但他们不会使用使用，除非你告诉他们。

所以不要这么做

据我所知，强烈建议不要使用终结器/析构函数:

public ~MyClass() {
  //dont use this
}

大多数情况下，这是因为不知道何时或是否会调用它。处置方法是更好的，特别是如果你使用或直接处置。

使用是好的。使用它:)

实现IDisposable的官方模式很难理解。我认为这个更好:

public class BetterDisposableClass : IDisposable {

  public void Dispose() {
    CleanUpManagedResources();
    CleanUpNativeResources();
    GC.SuppressFinalize(this);
  }

  protected virtual void CleanUpManagedResources() { 
    // ...
  }
  protected virtual void CleanUpNativeResources() {
    // ...
  }

  ~BetterDisposableClass() {
    CleanUpNativeResources();
  }

}

一个更好的解决方案是有一个规则，你总是必须为你需要处理的任何非托管资源创建一个包装器类:

public class NativeDisposable : IDisposable {

  public void Dispose() {
    CleanUpNativeResource();
    GC.SuppressFinalize(this);
  }

  protected virtual void CleanUpNativeResource() {
    // ...
  }

  ~NativeDisposable() {
    CleanUpNativeResource();
  }

}

对于SafeHandle及其衍生品，这些类应该非常少。

对于不直接处理非托管资源(即使存在继承)的一次性类，其结果是强大的:它们不再需要关心非托管资源。它们很容易实现和理解:

public class ManagedDisposable : IDisposable {

  public virtual void Dispose() {
    // dispose of managed resources
  }

}

另一个答案的某些方面有点不正确，原因有二:

首先,

using(NoGateway objNoGateway = new NoGateway())

Actually相当于:

try
{
    NoGateway = new NoGateway();
}
finally
{
    if(NoGateway != null)
    {
        NoGateway.Dispose();
    }
}

This may sound ridiculous since the 'new' operator should never return 'null' unless you have an OutOfMemory exception. But consider the following cases: 1. You call a FactoryClass that returns an IDisposable resource or 2. If you have a type that may or may not inherit from IDisposable depending on its implementation - remember that I've seen the IDisposable pattern implemented incorrectly many times at many clients where developers just add a Dispose() method without inheriting from IDisposable (bad, bad, bad). You could also have the case of an IDisposable resource being returned from a property or method (again bad, bad, bad - don't 'give away your IDisposable resources)

using(IDisposable objNoGateway = new NoGateway() as IDisposable)
{
    if (NoGateway != null)
    {
        ...

如果'as'操作符返回null(或返回资源的属性或方法)，并且'using'块中的代码可以防止'null'，那么在尝试对空对象调用Dispose时，您的代码不会因为'内置'空检查而崩溃。

你的回复不准确的第二个原因是由于以下stmt:

在GC销毁对象时调用终结器

First, Finalization (as well as GC itself) is non-deterministic. THe CLR determines when it will call a finalizer. i.e. the developer/code has no idea. If the IDisposable pattern is implemented correctly (as I've posted above) and GC.SuppressFinalize() has been called, the the Finalizer will NOT be called. This is one of the big reasons to properly implement the pattern correctly. Since there is only 1 Finalizer thread per managed process, regardless of the number of logical processors, you can easily degrade performance by backing up or even hanging the Finalizer thread by forgetting to call GC.SuppressFinalize().

我已经在我的博客上发布了Dispose模式的正确实现:如何正确地实现Dispose模式

使用lambdas代替IDisposable。

我从来没有对使用/IDisposable这个想法感到兴奋。问题是它要求调用者:

知道他们必须使用IDisposable 记住使用“using”。

我新的首选方法是使用工厂方法和lambda代替

假设我想用SqlConnection(应该用using包装的东西)做一些事情。通常你会这么做

using (Var conn = Factory.MakeConnection())
{
     conn.Query(....);
}

新方法

Factory.DoWithConnection((conn)=>
{
    conn.Query(...);
}

在第一种情况下，调用者不能简单地使用using语法。在第二种情况下，用户没有选择。没有创建SqlConnection对象的方法，调用者必须调用DoWithConnection。

DoWithConnection看起来像这样

void DoWithConnection(Action<SqlConnection> action)
{
   using (var conn = MakeConnection())
   {
       action(conn);
   }
}

MakeConnection现在是私有的