I would like to know if there is a better way to write this code.The main target is to let 'Select method' know which colum of our object we going to use in our query. I would like to have something like second code:
internal class Employee
{
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Sex { get; set; }
public int Age { get; set; }
}
public interface IRepository<T> where T : class
{
void Select(string[] table);
}
public class Repository<T> : IRepository<T> where T : class
{
public void Select(string[] table)
{
// Build Query
}
}
public partial class Main
{
public Main()
{
Repository<Employee> empRepository = new Repository<Employee>();
Employee myemp = new Employee();
string[] selectedColums = {nameof(myemp.ID), nameof((myemp.Sex) };
empRepository.Select(selectedColums);
}
}
Now in Main class i will do something like this:
public Main()
{
Repository<Employee> empRepository = new Repository<Employee>();
empRepository.Select(string[] selectedColums = {=>.Sex , =>.Name });
}
We Have already our Object so why we should have a new declaration of type Employee!
Thanks a lot.
Putting #xanatos suggestions into code, is this what you're looking for?
public Main()
{
Repository<Employee> empRepository = new Repository<Employee>();
string[] selectedColums = { nameof(Employee.ID), nameof(Employee.Sex) };
empRepository.Select(selectedColums);
}
Added bonus, nameof gets evaluated at compile time. So it can help catch errors before execution:
nameof(Employee.PropertyThatDoesntExist)
The above won't even compile.
Related
To cut down on reused code throughout my repository which gets values from another library, I wanted to create extension methods for "parsing"(for lack of a better word) one class to another. How do I implement abstract methods with different parameters.
I can't find anything that answers my question, and I'm not sure it can even be done.
Instead of having something like this in multiple places.
var list = _library.GetList();
var model = list.Select(o => new ClassA()
{
ID = o.ID,
Name = o.Name
}).ToList<ClassA>();
I want extension methods so I can call something like
var list = _library.GetList();
var model = ExtensionClass.ParseMany(list);
But, I want to base this off an abstract class so it can be reused by mutliple different classes, so I have
public abstract class Parser<U, T> where T : class where U : class
{
public abstract T ParseOne(U parser);
public abstract IEnumerable<T> ParseMany(IEnumerable<U> parser);
}
public class ParseA<ClassA, ClassADTO>
{
public override ClassA ParseOne(ClassADTO parser){ // }
}
But it doesn't seem that my parameter that is passed in is the actual object, it says it's a KeyValuePair and now I'm lost.
I expect to able to return a new instance based on my parameter, basically what I already do in my code multiple times.
I guess you can have a generic parser using Func. I just wrote a sample and hope it helps you.
public class ClassA
{
public int SomeNumber { get; set; }
public string SomeString { get; set; }
}
public class ClassB
{
public int OtherNumber { get; set; }
public string OtherString { get; set; }
}
public static class ExecuteParsingFunction
{
public static TDestiny Parse<TOrigin, TDestiny>(TOrigin origin,
Func<TOrigin, TDestiny> parserFunction)
{
return parserFunction(origin);
}
}
public static class ParsingFunctions
{
public static ClassB ParseAToB(ClassA a)
{
return new ClassB { OtherNumber = a.SomeNumber, OtherString = a.SomeString };
}
public static IEnumerable<ClassB> ParseManyAToB(IEnumerable<ClassA> aCollection)
{
foreach(var a in aCollection)
yield return ParseAToB(a);
}
}
public void Sample()
{
var a = new ClassA { SomeNumber = 1, SomeString = "Test" };
var manyAs = new List<ClassA> { a };
var b = ExecuteParsingFunction.Parse(a, ParserFunctions.ParseAToB);
var manyBs = ExecuteParsingFunction.Parse(manyAs, ParserFunctions.ParseManyAToB);
}
Lets say I have something like the following.
namespace BurgerMachine
{
public class BaseList{
private static readonly List<Bases> bList = new List<Bases>() //might need to take off readonly
{
new Bases(){ BaseID=1, BaseName="Bun"},
new Bases(){ BaseID=2, BaseName="SeededBun"}
};
public static List<Bases> GetList()
{
return bList;
}
}
public class Bases
{
public int BaseID { get; set; }
public string BaseName { get; set; }
}
}
Now I would like to access the elements of the above list from another class, is this doable with my current setup or do I need to be returning more?
I have seen a few examples of people creating a List and then adding to from another class but not trying to access elements that already exist. If such an example does exist please point me in the right direction.
First time using Lists in this fashion so I'm not quite sure what I am doing. Any help would be great. If more information is needed please ask.
Here are few implementations best way to return list.
With static class
public class BaseListProvider
{
public static readonly Bases Bun = new Bases() { BaseID = 1, BaseName = "Bun" };
public static readonly Bases SeededBun = new Bases() { BaseID = 2, BaseName = "SeededBun" };
public static IEnumerable<Bases> GetList()
{
return new[]
{
Bun,
SeededBun
};
}
}
public class Bases
{
public int BaseID { get; set; }
public string BaseName { get; set; }
}
With interface which can be helpful if you are using dependency injection
public class BaseListProvider : IBaseListProvider
{
public static readonly Bases Bun = new Bases() { BaseID = 1, BaseName = "Bun" };
public static readonly Bases SeededBun = new Bases() { BaseID = 2, BaseName = "SeededBun" };
public IEnumerable<Bases> GetList()
{
return new[]
{
Bun,
SeededBun
};
}
}
public interface IBaseListProvider
{
IEnumerable<Bases> GetList();
}
public class Bases
{
public int BaseID { get; set; }
public string BaseName { get; set; }
}
Well you could just make the list a public member like below and access it from wherever you want
public List<Bases> bList = new List<Bases>()
{
new Bases(){ BaseID=1, BaseName="Bun"},
new Bases(){ BaseID=2, BaseName="SeededBun"}
};
You can access now saying
var blist = new BaseList().bList;
With your current setup (as already commented) why can't you just call the static method saying BaseList.GetList()
I have a class that has some derived classes. That works.
I want to instantiate the "parent" class. Got that far...
But I want to instantiate it with one of the "child" classes, and then possibly change that "child" class later. Maybe the deriving is inappropriate here.
Take the following example:
public class Unicorn {
public string Horn { get; set; }
public Unicorn(){
}
}
public class BadUnicorn : Unicorn{
public string Rainbow()
{
return "dark rainbow";
}
}
public class GoodUnicorn : Unicorn{
public string Rainbow()
{
return "light rainbow";
}
}
I could instantiate one of the children, but then if I change one from "good" to "bad", I would have to re-instantiate. And maybe that's just the way it is, and that would be an acceptable answer if that's all there is to it.
I rather want to instantiate a Unicorn, and then be able to change it from Good to Bad to maintain information stored on that Unicorn, but have access to the current methods and properties of the "child" class.
That way when I call Unicorn.Rainbow() it calls the desired method of the "child" class.
I'm a little new to C#, is there a pattern that fits this bill?
You can't do what you want with polymorphism. You cannot change an instance of class from one to another. Once it is created it is always the same type.
You can use composition though.
Here's what you'd need to do:
public class Unicorn
{
public string Horn { get; set; }
public Unicorn(Rainbow rainbow)
{
_rainbow = rainbow;
}
public void SetRainbow(Rainbow rainbow)
{
_rainbow = rainbow;
}
private Rainbow _rainbow;
public string Rainbow()
{
return _rainbow.Colour();
}
}
public abstract class Rainbow
{
public abstract string Colour();
}
public class BadRainbow : Rainbow
{
public override string Colour()
{
return "dark rainbow";
}
}
public class GoodRainbow : Rainbow
{
public override string Colour()
{
return "light rainbow";
}
}
You can test like this:
var unicorn = new Unicorn(new GoodRainbow());
Console.WriteLine(unicorn.Rainbow());
unicorn.SetRainbow(new BadRainbow());
Console.WriteLine(unicorn.Rainbow());
This outputs:
light rainbow
dark rainbow
The instance of Unicorn stays the same, but you can change the rainbow.
Here's my take on delegate dictionary. While it seems superfluous to use Func instead of just string, if the method have additional functionality like calculation or need parameters, you're covered with Func.
public class Unicorn
{
static Dictionary<Attitude, Func<string>> RainbowByAttitude =
new Dictionary<Attitude, Func<string>>()
{
[Attitude.Bad] = new Func<string>(() => "dark rainbow"),
[Attitude.Good] = new Func<string>(()=>"light rainbow")
};
public string Horn { get; set; }
public enum Attitude
{
Good,Bad
}
public Attitude attitude;
public Unicorn(Attitude attitude)
{
this.attitude = attitude;
}
public string Rainbow() => RainbowByAttitude[attitude].Invoke();
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Unicorn unicorn;
unicorn = new Unicorn(Unicorn.Attitude.Bad);
Console.WriteLine(unicorn.Rainbow());
unicorn.attitude = Unicorn.Attitude.Good;
Console.WriteLine(unicorn.Rainbow());
}
}
It seems like a state pattern to me like this:
public abstract class UnicornState
{
public abstract UnicornState Change();
public abstract string Rainbow();
}
public sealed class GoodUnicornState : UnicornState
{
public override UnicornState Change()
{
return new BadUnicornState();
}
public override string Rainbow()
{
return "light rainbow";
}
}
public sealed class BadUnicornState : UnicornState
{
public override UnicornState Change()
{
return new GoodUnicornState();
}
public override string Rainbow()
{
return "dark rainbow";
}
}
public class Unicorn
{
public string Horn { get; set; }
public UnicornState State { get; set; }
public string Rainbow => State.Rainbow();
}
Usage:
var u = new Unicorn();
u.State = new GoodUnicornState();
Console.WriteLine(u.Rainbow);
u.State = u.State.Change();
Console.WriteLine(u.Rainbow);
I have this c# code;
case "Cafe":
source.trendItem = new TrendingLocation<ITrendingCafe>();
break;
case "Pub":
source.trendItem = new TrendingLocation<ITrendingPub>();
break;
etc
a trendItem is defined like this;
public class TrendingItem<T> where T : ITrendingItem
{
public T trendItem { get; set; }
}
Then I have this;
public List<TrendingItem<ITrendingItem>> trendItems { get; set; }
Now for each item in the above trendItems i want to get the interfaces.
I tried using;
string g = fvm.trendItems[4].trendItem.GetType().GetInterfaces()[1].Name;
and
string g = typeof(TrendingLocation<>).GetInterfaces()[0].Name;
but neither of these lists the Generic interface such as ITrendingCafe, ITrendingRestaurant etc.
Is there a way I can get the name of the generic interface name?
You want to use the Type's GetGenericArguments method.
If I understand your structure, it will be something like:
Type[] typeArguments = fvm.trendItems[4].trendItem.GetType().GetGenericArguments();
foreach (Type tParam in typeArguments)
{
// Compare the type with the interface you are looking for.
}
I take it that ITrendingCafe is an interface that implements ITrendingItem. I wrote a quick program that takes and displays all of the interfaces that T Implements:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
namespace TestConsoleApplication
{
public interface ITrendingItem
{
string ItemName { get; set; }
}
public interface ITrendingCafe : ITrendingItem
{
string CafeName { get; set; }
}
public class TrendingItem<T> where T : ITrendingItem
{
public T trendItem { get; set; }
}
public class Cafe : ITrendingCafe
{
public string ItemName { get; set; }
public string CafeName { get; set; }
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var test = new List<TrendingItem<ITrendingItem>> { new TrendingItem<ITrendingItem> { trendItem = new Cafe() } };
foreach (var trendingItem in test[0].trendItem.GetType().GetInterfaces())
{
Console.Out.WriteLine(trendingItem.Name);
}
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
}
And here is the output:
As you can see, the interface is there. Just loop through and find the one you need!
Hi
I have some problems in import scenarios example:
[Export(typeof(IICon))]
public class WriteInputData : IICon
{
[Import(typeof(IIOWriter))]
public IIOWriter IOWriter { get; set; }
public object Input { get; set; }
public void Process()
{
IOWriter.Write(Input);
}
}
Then i hawe two classes that implement interface IIOWriter like :
[Export(typeof(IIOWriter))]
public class FileWriter : IIOWriter
{
public string FilePath { get; set; }
public void Write(object data)
{
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(FilePath))
FilePath = #"c:\test.txt";
var fl = new StreamWriter(FilePath, true);
fl.Write((string)data);
fl.Flush();
fl.Close();
}
public string Name
{
get { return "FileWriter"; }
}
}
[Export(typeof(IIOWriter))]
public class ConsoleWrite : IIOWriter
{
public void Write(object data)
{
Console.WriteLine((string)data);
}
public string Name
{
get { return "ConsoleWrite"; }
}
}
How can i let that to user so he can change that in runtime, so example whene he type select in ListBox FileWriter than the IIOWriter in WriteInputData will be injected FileWriter end so one..
Sorry for my bad english.
You probably need to supply some metadata to the export, such like:
[Export(typeof(IIOWriter)),
ExportMetadata("Name", "ConsoleWriter")]
public class ConsoleWriter : IIOWriter
{
}
The reason you need to do this, is that you need to know ahead of time what the user selection will match to. Because of this, you may want to refactor your design to remove the dependency on the IOWriter property:
[Export(typeof(IICon))]
public class WriteInputData : IICon
{
public object Input { get; set; }
public void Process(IIOWriter writer)
{
}
}
If you define your Process method to take in an instance, we can resolve it using the CompositionContainer. Firstly, define a metadata interface that matches your ExportMetadata value:
public interface INamedMetadata
{
string Name { get; }
}
And then, we can resolve the instance:
public IIOWriter GetWriter(string name)
{
return container
.GetExports<IIOWriter, INamedMetadata>()
.Where(e => e.Metadata.Name.Equals(name, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase))
.Select(e => e.Value)
.FirstOrDefault();
}
Hope that points you in the right direction....