What happens when object running thread A is destroyed by thread B?

I may be greatly misunderstanding this threading scenario, but that's why I'm asking.

What would/might happen in the following situation (assume C# threading)? Note: this scenario is simplified to the core issue, extra functionality is ignored.

I have 2 objects, a and b, which are instances of classes A and B respectively; 'b' is a member of 'a'.

'b' is running a processing loop and has a few other activities continually doing something. At one point, 'b' detects a situation which causes it to send an event to 'a'. When 'a' recieves this event, it executes the following code:

void b_eventFoo()
{
    b.UnhookEvents();//clears the delegate that truggered this event function
    this.b = new B();        
    b.HookEvents(this);//connects the new b object to this A
}

What happens to the old 'B' object? The original 'b' still is doing some processing and the very thread that triggered the event could still be executing. I don't understand threading well enough to predict the results of this sc开发者_JAVA百科enario.

Does it even matter?

Please let me know if I should clarify anything.

At the start, you have:

Thread1: [A1] -----field ----> [B1]
              <--- event -----

You create a new thread, running a loop on B1; the key here is that delegates and instance methods (during use) themselves have a reference to the instance (it is "arg0" in IL terms); so you have:

Thread1: [A1] ---- field ----> [B1]
              <--- event -----   ^
Thread2: ------------------------^

You then unhook the event and cancel the field:

Thread1: [A1] ---- field ----> [nil]

Thread2: --------------------> [B1]

And recreate and rehook against a different instance:

Thread1: [A1] ---- field ----> [B2]
              <--- event -----

Thread2: --------------------> [B1]

So: your thread continues processing against [B1], but no longer impacts [A1]

The original B is still running, you would just lose the reference to it.

The old B is still running, and still has a reference to A. Since A is no longer aware of this B this is likely a very bad situation.

You should try to avoid circular references like this if at all possible, especially when an order of operations like this could happen. If A uses B and B uses A, why aren't they one class? They're fairly tightly coupled for them to both be accessing each other's members.