var dn = await Task.WhenAll<dynamic>(FeedCat(),SellHouse(),BuyCar());

如果你想访问Cat，你可以这样做:

var ct = (Cat)dn[0];

这是非常简单的做法和非常有用的使用，没有必要去追求一个复杂的解决方案。

如果你正在使用c# 7，你可以使用一个方便的包装方法，像这样…

public static class TaskEx
{
    public static async Task<(T1, T2)> WhenAll<T1, T2>(Task<T1> task1, Task<T2> task2)
    {
        return (await task1, await task2);
    }
}

.．.当您希望等待多个具有不同返回类型的任务时，可以启用这样的方便语法。当然，您必须对等待的不同数量的任务进行多次重载。

var (someInt, someString) = await TaskEx.WhenAll(GetIntAsync(), GetStringAsync());

但是，如果您打算把这个例子变成现实，请参阅Marc Gravell对ValueTask和已经完成的任务的一些优化的回答。

使用任务。然后等待结果:

var tCat = FeedCat();
var tHouse = SellHouse();
var tCar = BuyCar();
await Task.WhenAll(tCat, tHouse, tCar);
Cat cat = await tCat;
House house = await tHouse;
Tesla car = await tCar; 
//as they have all definitely finished, you could also use Task.Value.

给定三个任务——FeedCat()、SellHouse()和BuyCar()，有两种有趣的情况:要么它们都同步完成(出于某种原因，可能是缓存或错误)，要么它们不同步完成。

假设我们有，从这个问题

Task<string> DoTheThings() {
    Task<Cat> x = FeedCat();
    Task<House> y = SellHouse();
    Task<Tesla> z = BuyCar();
    // what here?
}

现在，一个简单的方法是:

Task.WhenAll(x, y, z);

但是…这样不方便处理结果;我们通常会等待:

async Task<string> DoTheThings() {
    Task<Cat> x = FeedCat();
    Task<House> y = SellHouse();
    Task<Tesla> z = BuyCar();

    await Task.WhenAll(x, y, z);
    // presumably we want to do something with the results...
    return DoWhatever(x.Result, y.Result, z.Result);
}

但是这会产生很多开销，并分配各种数组(包括params Task[]数组)和列表(内部)。这是可行的，但在我看来并不是很好。在许多方面，使用异步操作并依次等待每个操作会更简单:

async Task<string> DoTheThings() {
    Task<Cat> x = FeedCat();
    Task<House> y = SellHouse();
    Task<Tesla> z = BuyCar();

    // do something with the results...
    return DoWhatever(await x, await y, await z);
}

与上面的一些评论相反，使用await而不是Task。WhenAll对任务的运行方式(并发、顺序等)没有影响。在最高级别，任务。WhenAll在编译器支持async/await之前就已经存在了，在那些东西不存在的时候非常有用。当你有一个任意的任务数组，而不是3个离散的任务时，它也很有用。

但是:我们仍然有async/await为continuation生成大量编译器噪声的问题。如果有可能这些任务实际上是同步完成的，那么我们可以通过构建带有异步回退的同步路径来优化:

Task<string> DoTheThings() {
    Task<Cat> x = FeedCat();
    Task<House> y = SellHouse();
    Task<Tesla> z = BuyCar();

    if(x.Status == TaskStatus.RanToCompletion &&
       y.Status == TaskStatus.RanToCompletion &&
       z.Status == TaskStatus.RanToCompletion)
        return Task.FromResult(
          DoWhatever(a.Result, b.Result, c.Result));
       // we can safely access .Result, as they are known
       // to be ran-to-completion

    return Awaited(x, y, z);
}

async Task Awaited(Task<Cat> a, Task<House> b, Task<Tesla> c) {
    return DoWhatever(await x, await y, await z);
}

这种“同步路径与异步回退”方法越来越普遍，特别是在同步完成相对频繁的高性能代码中。注意，如果补全总是异步的，这一点帮助都没有。

适用于这里的其他事项:

with recent C#, a common pattern is for the async fallback method is commonly implemented as a local function: Task<string> DoTheThings() { async Task<string> Awaited(Task<Cat> a, Task<House> b, Task<Tesla> c) { return DoWhatever(await a, await b, await c); } Task<Cat> x = FeedCat(); Task<House> y = SellHouse(); Task<Tesla> z = BuyCar(); if(x.Status == TaskStatus.RanToCompletion && y.Status == TaskStatus.RanToCompletion && z.Status == TaskStatus.RanToCompletion) return Task.FromResult( DoWhatever(a.Result, b.Result, c.Result)); // we can safely access .Result, as they are known // to be ran-to-completion return Awaited(x, y, z); } prefer ValueTask<T> to Task<T> if there is a good chance of things ever completely synchronously with many different return values: ValueTask<string> DoTheThings() { async ValueTask<string> Awaited(ValueTask<Cat> a, Task<House> b, Task<Tesla> c) { return DoWhatever(await a, await b, await c); } ValueTask<Cat> x = FeedCat(); ValueTask<House> y = SellHouse(); ValueTask<Tesla> z = BuyCar(); if(x.IsCompletedSuccessfully && y.IsCompletedSuccessfully && z.IsCompletedSuccessfully) return new ValueTask<string>( DoWhatever(a.Result, b.Result, c.Result)); // we can safely access .Result, as they are known // to be ran-to-completion return Awaited(x, y, z); } if possible, prefer IsCompletedSuccessfully to Status == TaskStatus.RanToCompletion; this now exists in .NET Core for Task, and everywhere for ValueTask<T>

如果您试图记录所有错误，请确保您保留任务。代码中的WhenAll行，很多注释建议您可以删除它并等待单个任务。的任务。WhenAll对于错误处理非常重要。如果没有这一行，您可能会为未观察到的异常打开代码。

var catTask = FeedCat();
var houseTask = SellHouse();
var carTask = BuyCar();

await Task.WhenAll(catTask, houseTask, carTask);

var cat = await catTask;
var house = await houseTask;
var car = await carTask;

假设FeedCat在以下代码中抛出异常:

var catTask = FeedCat();
var houseTask = SellHouse();
var carTask = BuyCar();

var cat = await catTask;
var house = await houseTask;
var car = await carTask;

在这种情况下，您将永远不会等待houseTask或carTask。这里有3种可能的场景:

SellHouse is already completed successfully when FeedCat failed. In this case you are fine. SellHouse is not complete and fails with exception at some point. Exception is not observed and will be rethrown on finalizer thread. SellHouse is not complete and contains awaits inside it. In case your code runs in ASP.NET SellHouse will fail as soon as some of the awaits will completed inside it. This happens because you basically made fire & forget call and synchronization context was lost as soon as FeedCat failed.

下面是你将得到的case(3)的错误:

System.AggregateException: A Task's exception(s) were not observed either by Waiting on the Task or accessing its Exception property. As a result, the unobserved exception was rethrown by the finalizer thread. ---> System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
   at System.Web.ThreadContext.AssociateWithCurrentThread(Boolean setImpersonationContext)
   at System.Web.HttpApplication.OnThreadEnterPrivate(Boolean setImpersonationContext)
   at System.Web.HttpApplication.System.Web.Util.ISyncContext.Enter()
   at System.Web.Util.SynchronizationHelper.SafeWrapCallback(Action action)
   at System.Threading.Tasks.Task.Execute()
   --- End of inner exception stack trace ---
---> (Inner Exception #0) System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
   at System.Web.ThreadContext.AssociateWithCurrentThread(Boolean setImpersonationContext)
   at System.Web.HttpApplication.OnThreadEnterPrivate(Boolean setImpersonationContext)
   at System.Web.HttpApplication.System.Web.Util.ISyncContext.Enter()
   at System.Web.Util.SynchronizationHelper.SafeWrapCallback(Action action)
   at System.Threading.Tasks.Task.Execute()<---

对于情况(2)，您将得到类似的错误，但原始异常堆栈跟踪。

对于. net 4.0及更高版本，您可以使用TaskScheduler.UnobservedTaskException捕获未观察到的异常。对于。net 4.5及以后的版本，未观察到的异常将被默认接受，而对于。net 4.0，未观察到的异常将使您的进程崩溃。

更多详细信息请参见。net 4.5中的任务异常处理

The three tasks in your example differ greatly in importance. In case one of them fails, you probably want to know what happened with the others. For example in case the communication with the automatic cat feeder failed, you don't want to miss whether selling your house succeeded or failed. So it makes sense to return back not just a Cat, a House and a Tesla, but the tasks themselves. The calling code will then be able to query separately each of the three tasks, and react appropriately to their successful or failed completions:

public async Task<(Task<Cat>, Task<House>, Task<Tesla>)> FeedCatSellHouseBuyCar()
{
    Task<Cat> task1 = FeedCat();
    Task<House> task2 = SellHouse();
    Task<Tesla> task3 = BuyCar();

    // All three tasks are launched at this point.

    try { await Task.WhenAll(task1, task2, task3).ConfigureAwait(false); } catch { }

    // All three tasks are completed at this point.
    
    return (task1, task2, task3);
}

使用的例子:

var (catTask, houseTask, teslaTask) = await FeedCatSellHouseBuyCar();

// All three tasks are completed at this point.

if (catTask.IsCompletedSuccessfully)
    Console.WriteLine($"{catTask.Result.Name} is eating her healthy meal.");
else
    Console.WriteLine("Your cat is starving!");

if (houseTask.IsCompletedSuccessfully)
    Console.WriteLine($"Your house at {houseTask.Result.Address} was sold. You are now rich and homeless!");
else
    Console.WriteLine("You are still the poor owner of your house.");

if (teslaTask.IsCompletedSuccessfully)
    Console.WriteLine($"You are now the owner a battery-powered {teslaTask.Result.Name}.");
else
    Console.WriteLine("You are still driving a Hyundai.");

带有空catch的try块是必需的，因为. net 7仍然没有提供适当的方法来等待任务，而不会在取消或失败时抛出。