Why does my direct Equals call pass, but fails when nested? [duplicate] - c#

This question already has answers here:
How to compare arrays in C#? [duplicate]
(6 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
I am attempting to implement Equals overrides for some structs in my code. I have the following "child" struct
public struct ChildStruct
{
public bool Valid;
public int Value1;
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
if (obj == null || GetType() != obj.GetType())
{
return false;
}
ChildStruct other = (ChildStruct) obj;
return Valid == other.Valid && Surface == other.Value1;
}
}
And this "parent" struct where one member is an array of ChildStructs
public struct ParentStruct
{
public int Id;
public ChildStruct[] children;
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
if (obj == null || GetType() != obj.GetType())
{
return false;
}
ParentStruct other = (ParentStruct) obj;
// am I comparing ChildStructs array correctly?
return Id == other.Id && children == other.children;
}
}
In my Nunit testing of overriding the Equals methods, directly comparing objects of type ChildStruct pass, but my unit test of the ParentStructs are failing. Am I missing something in the Equals override in the ParentStruct to account for the array? Is the child Equals method not enumerated to all elements in the children array?
Nunit code:
[Test]
public void ChildEqual()
{
var child1 = new ChildStruct{Valid = true, Value1 = 1};
var child2 = new ChildStruct{Valid = true, Value1 = 1};
// passes!
Assert.AreEqual(child1, child2);
}
[Test]
public void ParentEqual()
{
var child1 = new ChildStruct{Valid = true, Value1 = 1};
var child2 = new ChildStruct{Valid = true, Value1 = 1};
var parent1 = new ParentStruct{Id = 1, children = new[] {child1, child2}}
var parent2 = new ParentStruct{Id = 1, children = new[] {child1, child2}}
// fails during checking for equality of children array!
Assert.AreEqual(parent1, parent2);
}

You need to determine what makes two arrays of ChildStructs equal, for the purpose of ParentStruct equality, and change the last line of ParentStruct's equals method accordingly. For example, if they're only supposed to be "equal" if they contain equivalent children in the same order, this would work:
return Id == other.Id && children.SequenceEqual(other.children);

Related

C# with object types the method Object.Equals (object a, object b) returns the wrong result [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Object.Equals return false
(2 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
I need to check the object (not all properties), with primitive types everything works correctly, but with object types the method Object.Equals(object a, object b) returns the wrong result.
public static bool IsModified<T>(T newProp, T oldProp) where T : class
{
List<string> IgnoreProps = new List<string> { "UpdatedOn", "UpdatedById", "UpdatedBy", "RowVersion" };
Type type = typeof(T);
foreach(PropertyInfo prop in type.GetProperties())
{
if (IgnoreProps.Contains(prop.Name))
{
continue;
}
var propType = prop.PropertyType;
var newValue = prop.GetValue(newProp);
var oldValue = prop.GetValue(oldProp);
newValue = Convert.ChangeType(newValue, propType);
oldValue = Convert.ChangeType(oldValue, propType);
var a = Equals(newValue, oldValue); // return incorrect value
if (!Equals(newValue, oldValue))
{
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
First object
Second object
The default implementation of Equals supports reference equality for
reference types, and bitwise equality for value types. Reference
equality means the object references that are compared refer to the
same object. Bitwise equality means the objects that are compared have
the same binary representation.
(https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.object.equals?redirectedfrom=MSDN&view=netcore-3.1)
As you have two different references (var newValue, var oldValue) you get false.
Consider you have a class MyCustomClass and the following example:
class MyCustomClass
{
public string txt;
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
MyCustomClass cl1 = new MyCustomClass()
{
txt = "a"
};
MyCustomClass cl2 = new MyCustomClass()
{
txt = "a"
};
if (Equals(cl1, cl2))
Console.WriteLine("equal");
else
Console.WriteLine("NOT equal");
}
If you run the above code you will get as output NOT equal. This is because .net will try to compare only the references between the 2 instances of the class. eg, if you write:
if (Equals(cl1, cl1))
Console.WriteLine("equal");
else
Console.WriteLine("NOT equal");
this will result to equal as you compare the same instance cl1 to cl1.
For you in order to do comparisons with the Equals method you will have to overwrite it in your class. For example your class should become:
class MyCustomClass
{
public string txt;
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
//Check for null and compare run-time types.
if ((obj == null) || !this.GetType().Equals(obj.GetType()))
{
return false;
}
else
{
MyCustomClass p = (MyCustomClass)obj;
return (txt == p.txt);
}
}
}
The above Equals method, not only it ensures that the object compared is not null, and also of the same type but it ensures that it compares all fields of them one by one.

Linq - Select distinct objects [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Distinct not working with LINQ to Objects [duplicate]
(11 answers)
Closed 4 years ago.
I am trying to extract distinct objects by their values to have the unique CurrencyISO I have in the .csv.
public List<CurrencyDetail> InitGSCheckComboCurrency()
{
var lines = File.ReadAllLines("Data/AccountsGSCheck.csv");
var data = (from l in lines.Skip(1)
let split = l.Split(',')
select new CurrencyDetail
{
ISOName = split[3],
ISOCode = split[3]
}).Distinct();
List<CurrencyDetail> lstSrv = new List<CurrencyDetail>();
lstSrv = data.ToList();
return lstSrv;
}
However, the distinct function does not work for this and I end up with duplications.
You would need to define the Equals and GetHashCode of CurrencyDetail to do what you want. Quick and dirty solution:
var data = (from l in lines.Skip(1)
let split = l.Split(',')
select new
{
ISOName = split[3],
ISOCode = split[3]
}).Distinct()
.Select(x => new CurrencyDetail
{
ISOName = x.ISOName,
ISOCode = x.ISOCode
};
Anonymous types (the first new { ... }) automatically define sensible Equals() and GetHashCode(). Normally I wouldn't do this, because you are creating objects to then discard them. For this reason it is a quick and dirty solution.
Note that you are using twice split[3]... an error?
Now, a fully equatable version of CurrencyDetail could be:
public class CurrencyDetail : IEquatable<CurrencyDetail>
{
public string ISOName { get; set; }
public string ISOCode { get; set; }
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
// obj is object, so we can use its == operator
if (obj == null)
{
return false;
}
CurrencyDetail other = obj as CurrencyDetail;
if (object.ReferenceEquals(other, null))
{
return false;
}
return this.InnerEquals(other);
}
public bool Equals(CurrencyDetail other)
{
if (object.ReferenceEquals(other, null))
{
return false;
}
return this.InnerEquals(other);
}
private bool InnerEquals(CurrencyDetail other)
{
// Here we know that other != null;
if (object.ReferenceEquals(this, other))
{
return true;
}
return this.ISOName == other.ISOName && this.ISOCode == other.ISOCode;
}
public override int GetHashCode()
{
unchecked
{
// From http://stackoverflow.com/a/263416/613130
int hash = 17;
hash = hash * 23 + (this.ISOName != null ? this.ISOName.GetHashCode() : 0);
hash = hash * 23 + (this.ISOCode != null ? this.ISOCode.GetHashCode() : 0);
return hash;
}
}
}
With this you can use the Distinct() as used by your code.

Arg<object>.Is.Equal with anonymous objects

In my MVC3 project, I use an IUrlProvider interface to wrap the UrlHelper class. In one of my controller actions, I have a call like this:
string url = _urlProvider.Action("ValidateCode", new { code = "spam-and-eggs" });
I want to stub this method call in my unit test, which is in a separate project. The test setup looks something like this:
IUrlProvider urlProvider = MockRepository.GenerateStub<IUrlProvider>();
urlProvider.Stub(u => u.Action(
Arg<string>.Is.Equal("ValidateCode"),
Arg<object>.Is.Equal(new { code = "spam-and-eggs" }) ))
.Return("http://www.mysite.com/validate/spam-and-eggs");
Unfortunately, Arg<object>.Is.Equal(new { code = "spam-and-eggs" }) doesn't work, because new { code = "spam-and-eggs" } != new { code = "spam-and-eggs" } when the anonymous types are declared in different assemblies.
So, is there an alternative syntax I can use with Rhino Mocks to check for matching field values between anonymous objects across assemblies?
Or should I replace the anonymous object declarations with a class, like this?
public class CodeArg
{
public string code { get; set; }
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
if(obj == null || GetType() != obj.GetType())
{
return false;
}
return code == ((CodeArg)obj).code;
}
public override int GetHashCode()
{
return code.GetHashCode();
}
}
string url = _urlProvider.Action("ValidateCode",
new CodeArg { code = "spam-and-eggs" });
IUrlProvider urlProvider = MockRepository.GenerateStub<IUrlProvider>();
urlProvider.Stub(u => u.Action(
Arg<string>.Is.Equal("ValidateCode"),
Arg<CodeArg>.Is.Equal(new CodeArg { code = "spam-and-eggs" }) ))
.Return("http://www.mysite.com/validate/spam-and-eggs");
EDIT
If my unit test was in the same project as my controller, comparing the anonymous objects would work fine. Because they are declared in separate assemblies, they will not be equal, even if they have the same field names and values. Comparing anonymous objects created by methods in different namespaces doesn't seem to be a problem.
SOLUTION
I replaced Arg<object>.Is.Equal() with Arg<object>.Matches() using a custom AbstractConstraint:
IUrlProvider urlProvider = MockRepository.GenerateStub<IUrlProvider>();
urlProvider.Stub(u => u.Action(
Arg<string>.Is.Equal("ValidateCode"),
Arg<object>.Matches(new PropertiesMatchConstraint(new { code = "spam-and-eggs" })) ))
.Return("http://www.mysite.com/validate/spam-and-eggs");
public class PropertiesMatchConstraint : AbstractConstraint
{
private readonly object _equal;
public PropertiesMatchConstraint(object obj)
{
_equal = obj;
}
public override bool Eval(object obj)
{
if (obj == null)
{
return (_equal == null);
}
var equalType = _equal.GetType();
var objType = obj.GetType();
foreach (var property in equalType.GetProperties())
{
var otherProperty = objType.GetProperty(property.Name);
if (otherProperty == null || property.GetValue(_equal, null) != otherProperty.GetValue(obj, null))
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
public override string Message
{
get
{
string str = _equal == null ? "null" : _equal.ToString();
return "equal to " + str;
}
}
}
Anonymous types do implement Equals and GetHashCode in a pretty normal way, calling GetHashCode and Equals for each of their submembers.
So this should pass:
Assert.AreEqual(new { code = "spam-and-eggs" },
new { code = "spam-and-eggs" });
In other words, I suspect you're looking for the problem in the wrong place.
Note that you have to specify the properties in exactly the right order - so new { a = 0, b = 1 } will not be equal to new { b = 1, a = 0 }; the two objects will be of different types.
EDIT: The anonymous type instance creation expressions have to be in the same assembly, too. This is no doubt the problem in this case.
If Equals allows you to specify an IEqualityComparer<T>, you could probably build one which is able to compare two anonymous types with the same properties by creating an instance of one type from the properties of an instance of the other, and then comparing that to the original of the same type. Of course if you were using nested anonymous types you'd need to do that recursively, which could get ugly...
As GetValue returns a boxed value, this appears to work correctly.
public class PropertiesMatchConstraint : AbstractConstraint
{
private readonly object _equal;
public PropertiesMatchConstraint(object obj)
{
_equal = obj;
}
public override bool Eval(object obj)
{
if (obj == null)
{
return (_equal == null);
}
var equalType = _equal.GetType();
var objType = obj.GetType();
foreach (var property in equalType.GetProperties())
{
var otherProperty = objType.GetProperty(property.Name);
if (otherProperty == null || !_ValuesMatch(property.GetValue(_equal, null), otherProperty.GetValue(obj, null)))
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
//fix for boxed conversions object:Guid != object:Guid when both values are the same guid - must call .Equals()
private bool _ValuesMatch(object value, object otherValue)
{
if (value == otherValue)
return true; //return early
if (value != null)
return value.Equals(otherValue);
return otherValue.Equals(value);
}
public override string Message
{
get
{
string str = _equal == null ? "null" : _equal.ToString();
return "equal to " + str;
}
}
}

Should I Overload == Operator?

How does the == operator really function in C#? If it used to compare objects of class A, will it try to match all of A's properties, or will it look for pointers to the same memory location (or maybe something else)?
Let's create a hypothetical example. I'm writing an application that utilizes the Twitter API, and it has a Tweet class, which has all the properties of a single tweet: text, sender, date&time, source, etc. If I want to compare objects of class Tweet for equivalence, can I just use:
Tweet a, b;
if (a == b)
{
//do something...
}
Will that check for equivalence of all the properties of the Tweet class between a and b?
If not, would the correct approach be to overload the == operator to explicitly check for equivalence of all the fields?
UPDATE: From the first two answers, am I right in assuming:
If the == operator or Equals method is not overloaded for a class, the == operator for the object class is used.
The == operator for the object class checks for equality in memory location.
I have to overload the == operator or the Equals method to accomplish this task.
In the overload, I have to check for equivalence in properties manually, so there is no way to do it semi-automatically, say, in a loop, right?
UPDATE #2: Yuriy made a comment that it is possible to do check for equivalence in properties in the == operator with reflection. How can this be done? Could you give me some sample code? Thanks!
For reference types, the default implementations of both the == operator and the Equals() method will simply check that both objects have the same reference, and are therefore the same instance.
If you want to check the contents of two different objects are equal then you must write the code to do it yourself, one way or another. It would be possible to do with reflection (the MbUnit test framework does something along these lines) but with a heavy performance penalty and a good chance that it wouldn't do quite what you expected anyway, and you should implement == or Equals and GetHashCode by hand.
MSDN has a good example of how to do it:
public override bool Equals(object o)
{
try
{
return (bool) (this == (DBBool) o);
}
catch
{
return false;
}
}
Then you overload the == and !=:
// Equality operator. Returns dbNull if either operand is dbNull,
// otherwise returns dbTrue or dbFalse:
public static DBBool operator ==(DBBool x, DBBool y)
{
if (x.value == 0 || y.value == 0) return dbNull;
return x.value == y.value? dbTrue: dbFalse;
}
// Inequality operator. Returns dbNull if either operand is
// dbNull, otherwise returns dbTrue or dbFalse:
public static DBBool operator !=(DBBool x, DBBool y)
{
if (x.value == 0 || y.value == 0) return dbNull;
return x.value != y.value? dbTrue: dbFalse;
}
And don't forget to overload the GetHash method.
Edit:
I wrote the following quick sample for using reflection in a compare. This would have to be much more comprehensive, I might try doing a blog on it if people want me to:
public class TestEquals
{
private int _x;
public TestEquals(int x)
{
this._x = x;
}
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
TestEquals te = (TestEquals)obj;
if (te == null) return false;
foreach (var field in typeof(TestEquals)
.GetFields(BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance))
{
if (!field.GetValue(this).Equals(field.GetValue(te)))
return false;
}
return true;
}
}
The proper approach is the overload the equals method of the Tweet class in addition to the == operator, as described here.
Will that check for equivalence of all the properties of the Tweet class between a and b?
No
If not, would the correct approach be to overload the == operator to explicitly check for equivalence of all the fields?
You can either overload the == operator, or overload the Equals function.
Edit
#Yuriy gave a good example for compating all the non public variables. Since i also wrote an example, here it is (mine compares properties)
class TwitterItem
{
private string myValue = "default value";
public string Value1
{
get { return myValue; }
set { myValue = value; }
}
public string Value2
{
get { return myValue; }
set { myValue = value; }
}
public string Value3
{
get { return myValue; }
set { myValue = value; }
}
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
if (base.Equals(obj)) return true;
Type type = typeof(TwitterItem);
PropertyInfo[] properties = type.GetProperties();
foreach (PropertyInfo property in properties)
{
if (false == property.GetValue(this, null).Equals(property.GetValue(obj, null)))
return false;
}
return true;
}
}
You can compare the properties using reflection:
var a = new Entity() { Name = "test", ID = "1" };
var b = new Entity() { Name = "test", ID = "1" };
var c = new Entity() { Name = "test", ID = "2" };
System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine(a.Equals(b));//Returns true
System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine(a.Equals(c));//Returns false
public class Entity
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string ID { get; set; }
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
var t = obj.GetType();
foreach (var p in t.GetProperties())
{
if (t.GetProperty(p.Name).GetValue(obj, null) != t.GetProperty(p.Name).GetValue(this, null))
return false;
}
return true;
}
}

Comparing object properties in c# [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 4 years ago.
Locked. This question and its answers are locked because the question is off-topic but has historical significance. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.
This is what I've come up with as a method on a class inherited by many of my other classes. The idea is that it allows the simple comparison between properties of Objects of the same Type.
Now, this does work - but in the interest of improving the quality of my code I thought I'd throw it out for scrutiny. How can it be better/more efficient/etc.?
/// <summary>
/// Compare property values (as strings)
/// </summary>
/// <param name="obj"></param>
/// <returns></returns>
public bool PropertiesEqual(object comparisonObject)
{
Type sourceType = this.GetType();
Type destinationType = comparisonObject.GetType();
if (sourceType == destinationType)
{
PropertyInfo[] sourceProperties = sourceType.GetProperties();
foreach (PropertyInfo pi in sourceProperties)
{
if ((sourceType.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(this, null) == null && destinationType.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(comparisonObject, null) == null))
{
// if both are null, don't try to compare (throws exception)
}
else if (!(sourceType.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(this, null).ToString() == destinationType.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(comparisonObject, null).ToString()))
{
// only need one property to be different to fail Equals.
return false;
}
}
}
else
{
throw new ArgumentException("Comparison object must be of the same type.","comparisonObject");
}
return true;
}
I was looking for a snippet of code that would do something similar to help with writing unit test. Here is what I ended up using.
public static bool PublicInstancePropertiesEqual<T>(T self, T to, params string[] ignore) where T : class
{
if (self != null && to != null)
{
Type type = typeof(T);
List<string> ignoreList = new List<string>(ignore);
foreach (System.Reflection.PropertyInfo pi in type.GetProperties(System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Public | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Instance))
{
if (!ignoreList.Contains(pi.Name))
{
object selfValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(self, null);
object toValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(to, null);
if (selfValue != toValue && (selfValue == null || !selfValue.Equals(toValue)))
{
return false;
}
}
}
return true;
}
return self == to;
}
EDIT:
Same code as above but uses LINQ and Extension methods :
public static bool PublicInstancePropertiesEqual<T>(this T self, T to, params string[] ignore) where T : class
{
if (self != null && to != null)
{
var type = typeof(T);
var ignoreList = new List<string>(ignore);
var unequalProperties =
from pi in type.GetProperties(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance)
where !ignoreList.Contains(pi.Name) && pi.GetUnderlyingType().IsSimpleType() && pi.GetIndexParameters().Length == 0
let selfValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(self, null)
let toValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(to, null)
where selfValue != toValue && (selfValue == null || !selfValue.Equals(toValue))
select selfValue;
return !unequalProperties.Any();
}
return self == to;
}
public static class TypeExtensions
{
/// <summary>
/// Determine whether a type is simple (String, Decimal, DateTime, etc)
/// or complex (i.e. custom class with public properties and methods).
/// </summary>
/// <see cref="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2442534/how-to-test-if-type-is-primitive"/>
public static bool IsSimpleType(
this Type type)
{
return
type.IsValueType ||
type.IsPrimitive ||
new[]
{
typeof(String),
typeof(Decimal),
typeof(DateTime),
typeof(DateTimeOffset),
typeof(TimeSpan),
typeof(Guid)
}.Contains(type) ||
(Convert.GetTypeCode(type) != TypeCode.Object);
}
public static Type GetUnderlyingType(this MemberInfo member)
{
switch (member.MemberType)
{
case MemberTypes.Event:
return ((EventInfo)member).EventHandlerType;
case MemberTypes.Field:
return ((FieldInfo)member).FieldType;
case MemberTypes.Method:
return ((MethodInfo)member).ReturnType;
case MemberTypes.Property:
return ((PropertyInfo)member).PropertyType;
default:
throw new ArgumentException
(
"Input MemberInfo must be if type EventInfo, FieldInfo, MethodInfo, or PropertyInfo"
);
}
}
}
UPDATE: The latest version of Compare-Net-Objects is located on GitHub , has NuGet package and Tutorial. It can be called like
//This is the comparison class
CompareLogic compareLogic = new CompareLogic();
ComparisonResult result = compareLogic.Compare(person1, person2);
//These will be different, write out the differences
if (!result.AreEqual)
Console.WriteLine(result.DifferencesString);
Or if you need to change some configuration, use
CompareLogic basicComparison = new CompareLogic()
{ Config = new ComparisonConfig()
{ MaxDifferences = propertyCount
//add other configurations
}
};
Full list of configurable parameters is in ComparisonConfig.cs
Original answer:
The limitations I see in your code:
The biggest one is that it doesn't do a deep object comparison.
It doesn't do an element by element comparison in case properties are lists or contain lists as elements (this can go n-levels).
It doesn't take into account that some type of properties should not be compared (e.g. a Func property used for filtering purposes, like the one in the PagedCollectionView class).
It doesn't keep track of what properties actually were different (so you can show in your assertions).
I was looking today for some solution for unit-testing purposes to do property by property deep comparison and I ended up using: http://comparenetobjects.codeplex.com.
It is a free library with just one class which you can simply use like this:
var compareObjects = new CompareObjects()
{
CompareChildren = true, //this turns deep compare one, otherwise it's shallow
CompareFields = false,
CompareReadOnly = true,
ComparePrivateFields = false,
ComparePrivateProperties = false,
CompareProperties = true,
MaxDifferences = 1,
ElementsToIgnore = new List<string>() { "Filter" }
};
Assert.IsTrue(
compareObjects.Compare(objectA, objectB),
compareObjects.DifferencesString
);
Also, it can be easily re-compiled for Silverlight. Just copy the one class into a Silverlight project and remove one or two lines of code for comparisons that are not available in Silverlight, like private members comparison.
I think it would be best to follow the pattern for Override Object#Equals()
For a better description: Read Bill Wagner's Effective C# - Item 9 I think
public override Equals(object obOther)
{
if (null == obOther)
return false;
if (object.ReferenceEquals(this, obOther)
return true;
if (this.GetType() != obOther.GetType())
return false;
# private method to compare members.
return CompareMembers(this, obOther as ThisClass);
}
Also in methods that check for equality, you should return either true or false. either they are equal or they are not.. instead of throwing an exception, return false.
I'd consider overriding Object#Equals.
Even though you must have considered this, using Reflection to compare properties is supposedly slow (I dont have numbers to back this up). This is the default behavior for valueType#Equals in C# and it is recommended that you override Equals for value types and do a member wise compare for performance. (Earlier I speed-read this as you have a collection of custom Property objects... my bad.)
Update-Dec 2011:
Of course, if the type already has a production Equals() then you need another approach.
If you're using this to compare immutable data structures exclusively for test purposes, you shouldn't add an Equals to production classes (Someone might hose the tests by chainging the Equals implementation or you may prevent creation of a production-required Equals implementation).
If performance doesn't matter, you could serialize them and compare the results:
var serializer = new XmlSerializer(typeof(TheObjectType));
StringWriter serialized1 = new StringWriter(), serialized2 = new StringWriter();
serializer.Serialize(serialized1, obj1);
serializer.Serialize(serialized2, obj2);
bool areEqual = serialized1.ToString() == serialized2.ToString();
I think the answer of Big T was quite good but the deep comparison was missing, so I tweaked it a little bit:
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Reflection;
/// <summary>Comparison class.</summary>
public static class Compare
{
/// <summary>Compare the public instance properties. Uses deep comparison.</summary>
/// <param name="self">The reference object.</param>
/// <param name="to">The object to compare.</param>
/// <param name="ignore">Ignore property with name.</param>
/// <typeparam name="T">Type of objects.</typeparam>
/// <returns><see cref="bool">True</see> if both objects are equal, else <see cref="bool">false</see>.</returns>
public static bool PublicInstancePropertiesEqual<T>(T self, T to, params string[] ignore) where T : class
{
if (self != null && to != null)
{
var type = self.GetType();
var ignoreList = new List<string>(ignore);
foreach (var pi in type.GetProperties(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance))
{
if (ignoreList.Contains(pi.Name))
{
continue;
}
var selfValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(self, null);
var toValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(to, null);
if (pi.PropertyType.IsClass && !pi.PropertyType.Module.ScopeName.Equals("CommonLanguageRuntimeLibrary"))
{
// Check of "CommonLanguageRuntimeLibrary" is needed because string is also a class
if (PublicInstancePropertiesEqual(selfValue, toValue, ignore))
{
continue;
}
return false;
}
if (selfValue != toValue && (selfValue == null || !selfValue.Equals(toValue)))
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
return self == to;
}
}
I would add the following line to the PublicInstancePropertiesEqual method to avoid copy & paste errors:
Assert.AreNotSame(self, to);
Do you override .ToString() on all of your objects that are in the properties? Otherwise, that second comparison could come back with null.
Also, in that second comparison, I'm on the fence about the construct of !( A == B) compared to (A != B), in terms of readability six months/two years from now. The line itself is pretty wide, which is ok if you've got a wide monitor, but might not print out very well. (nitpick)
Are all of your objects always using properties such that this code will work? Could there be some internal, non-propertied data that could be different from one object to another, but all exposed data is the same? I'm thinking of some data which could change over time, like two random number generators that happen to hit the same number at one point, but are going to produce two different sequences of information, or just any data that doesn't get exposed through the property interface.
If you are only comparing objects of the same type or further down the inheritance chain, why not specify the parameter as your base type, rather than object ?
Also do null checks on the parameter as well.
Furthermore I'd make use of 'var' just to make the code more readable (if its c#3 code)
Also, if the object has reference types as properties then you are just calling ToString() on them which doesn't really compare values. If ToString isn't overwridden then its just going to return the type name as a string which could return false-positives.
The first thing I would suggest would be to split up the actual comparison so that it's a bit more readable (I've also taken out the ToString() - is that needed?):
else {
object originalProperty = sourceType.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(this, null);
object comparisonProperty = destinationType.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(comparisonObject, null);
if (originalProperty != comparisonProperty)
return false;
The next suggestion would be to minimise the use of reflection as much as possible - it's really slow. I mean, really slow. If you are going to do this, I would suggest caching the property references. I'm not intimately familiar with the Reflection API, so if this is a bit off, just adjust to make it compile:
// elsewhere
Dictionary<object, Property[]> lookupDictionary = new Dictionary<object, Property[]>;
Property[] objectProperties = null;
if (lookupDictionary.ContainsKey(sourceType)) {
objectProperties = lookupProperties[sourceType];
} else {
// build array of Property references
PropertyInfo[] sourcePropertyInfos = sourceType.GetProperties();
Property[] sourceProperties = new Property[sourcePropertyInfos.length];
for (int i=0; i < sourcePropertyInfos.length; i++) {
sourceProperties[i] = sourceType.GetProperty(pi.Name);
}
// add to cache
objectProperties = sourceProperties;
lookupDictionary[object] = sourceProperties;
}
// loop through and compare against the instances
However, I have to say that I agree with the other posters. This smells lazy and inefficient. You should be implementing IComparable instead :-).
here is revised one to treat null = null as equal
private bool PublicInstancePropertiesEqual<T>(T self, T to, params string[] ignore) where T : class
{
if (self != null && to != null)
{
Type type = typeof(T);
List<string> ignoreList = new List<string>(ignore);
foreach (PropertyInfo pi in type.GetProperties(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance))
{
if (!ignoreList.Contains(pi.Name))
{
object selfValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(self, null);
object toValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(to, null);
if (selfValue != null)
{
if (!selfValue.Equals(toValue))
return false;
}
else if (toValue != null)
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
return self == to;
}
I ended up doing this:
public static string ToStringNullSafe(this object obj)
{
return obj != null ? obj.ToString() : String.Empty;
}
public static bool Compare<T>(T a, T b)
{
int count = a.GetType().GetProperties().Count();
string aa, bb;
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++)
{
aa = a.GetType().GetProperties()[i].GetValue(a, null).ToStringNullSafe();
bb = b.GetType().GetProperties()[i].GetValue(b, null).ToStringNullSafe();
if (aa != bb)
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
Usage:
if (Compare<ObjectType>(a, b))
Update
If you want to ignore some properties by name:
public static string ToStringNullSafe(this object obj)
{
return obj != null ? obj.ToString() : String.Empty;
}
public static bool Compare<T>(T a, T b, params string[] ignore)
{
int count = a.GetType().GetProperties().Count();
string aa, bb;
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++)
{
aa = a.GetType().GetProperties()[i].GetValue(a, null).ToStringNullSafe();
bb = b.GetType().GetProperties()[i].GetValue(b, null).ToStringNullSafe();
if (aa != bb && ignore.Where(x => x == a.GetType().GetProperties()[i].Name).Count() == 0)
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
Usage:
if (MyFunction.Compare<ObjType>(a, b, "Id","AnotherProp"))
You can optimize your code by calling GetProperties only once per type:
public static string ToStringNullSafe(this object obj)
{
return obj != null ? obj.ToString() : String.Empty;
}
public static bool Compare<T>(T a, T b, params string[] ignore)
{
var aProps = a.GetType().GetProperties();
var bProps = b.GetType().GetProperties();
int count = aProps.Count();
string aa, bb;
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++)
{
aa = aProps[i].GetValue(a, null).ToStringNullSafe();
bb = bProps[i].GetValue(b, null).ToStringNullSafe();
if (aa != bb && ignore.Where(x => x == aProps[i].Name).Count() == 0)
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
For completeness I want to add reference to
http://www.cyotek.com/blog/comparing-the-properties-of-two-objects-via-reflection
It has more complete logic than most of others answers on this page.
However I prefer Compare-Net-Objects library
https://github.com/GregFinzer/Compare-Net-Objects (referred by Liviu Trifoi's answer)
The library has NuGet package http://www.nuget.org/packages/CompareNETObjects and multiple options to configure.
Make sure objects aren't null.
Having obj1 and obj2:
if(obj1 == null )
{
return false;
}
return obj1.Equals( obj2 );
This works even if the objects are different. you could customize the methods in the utilities class maybe you want to compare private properties as well...
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
class ObjectA
{
public string PropertyA { get; set; }
public string PropertyB { get; set; }
public string PropertyC { get; set; }
public DateTime PropertyD { get; set; }
public string FieldA;
public DateTime FieldB;
}
class ObjectB
{
public string PropertyA { get; set; }
public string PropertyB { get; set; }
public string PropertyC { get; set; }
public DateTime PropertyD { get; set; }
public string FieldA;
public DateTime FieldB;
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
// create two objects with same properties
ObjectA a = new ObjectA() { PropertyA = "test", PropertyB = "test2", PropertyC = "test3" };
ObjectB b = new ObjectB() { PropertyA = "test", PropertyB = "test2", PropertyC = "test3" };
// add fields to those objects
a.FieldA = "hello";
b.FieldA = "Something differnt";
if (a.ComparePropertiesTo(b))
{
Console.WriteLine("objects have the same properties");
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("objects have diferent properties!");
}
if (a.CompareFieldsTo(b))
{
Console.WriteLine("objects have the same Fields");
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("objects have diferent Fields!");
}
Console.Read();
}
}
public static class Utilities
{
public static bool ComparePropertiesTo(this Object a, Object b)
{
System.Reflection.PropertyInfo[] properties = a.GetType().GetProperties(); // get all the properties of object a
foreach (var property in properties)
{
var propertyName = property.Name;
var aValue = a.GetType().GetProperty(propertyName).GetValue(a, null);
object bValue;
try // try to get the same property from object b. maybe that property does
// not exist!
{
bValue = b.GetType().GetProperty(propertyName).GetValue(b, null);
}
catch
{
return false;
}
if (aValue == null && bValue == null)
continue;
if (aValue == null && bValue != null)
return false;
if (aValue != null && bValue == null)
return false;
// if properties do not match return false
if (aValue.GetHashCode() != bValue.GetHashCode())
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
public static bool CompareFieldsTo(this Object a, Object b)
{
System.Reflection.FieldInfo[] fields = a.GetType().GetFields(); // get all the properties of object a
foreach (var field in fields)
{
var fieldName = field.Name;
var aValue = a.GetType().GetField(fieldName).GetValue(a);
object bValue;
try // try to get the same property from object b. maybe that property does
// not exist!
{
bValue = b.GetType().GetField(fieldName).GetValue(b);
}
catch
{
return false;
}
if (aValue == null && bValue == null)
continue;
if (aValue == null && bValue != null)
return false;
if (aValue != null && bValue == null)
return false;
// if properties do not match return false
if (aValue.GetHashCode() != bValue.GetHashCode())
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
}
Update on Liviu's answer above - CompareObjects.DifferencesString has been deprecated.
This works well in a unit test:
CompareLogic compareLogic = new CompareLogic();
ComparisonResult result = compareLogic.Compare(object1, object2);
Assert.IsTrue(result.AreEqual);
This method will get properties of the class and compare the values for each property. If any of the values are different, it will return false, else it will return true.
public static bool Compare<T>(T Object1, T object2)
{
//Get the type of the object
Type type = typeof(T);
//return false if any of the object is false
if (Object1 == null || object2 == null)
return false;
//Loop through each properties inside class and get values for the property from both the objects and compare
foreach (System.Reflection.PropertyInfo property in type.GetProperties())
{
if (property.Name != "ExtensionData")
{
string Object1Value = string.Empty;
string Object2Value = string.Empty;
if (type.GetProperty(property.Name).GetValue(Object1, null) != null)
Object1Value = type.GetProperty(property.Name).GetValue(Object1, null).ToString();
if (type.GetProperty(property.Name).GetValue(object2, null) != null)
Object2Value = type.GetProperty(property.Name).GetValue(object2, null).ToString();
if (Object1Value.Trim() != Object2Value.Trim())
{
return false;
}
}
}
return true;
}
Usage:
bool isEqual = Compare<Employee>(Object1, Object2)
To expand on #nawfal:s answer, I use this to test objects of different types in my unit tests to compare equal property names. In my case database entity and DTO.
Used like this in my test;
Assert.IsTrue(resultDto.PublicInstancePropertiesEqual(expectedEntity));
public static bool PublicInstancePropertiesEqual<T, Z>(this T self, Z to, params string[] ignore) where T : class
{
if (self != null && to != null)
{
var type = typeof(T);
var type2 = typeof(Z);
var ignoreList = new List<string>(ignore);
var unequalProperties =
from pi in type.GetProperties(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance)
where !ignoreList.Contains(pi.Name)
let selfValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(self, null)
let toValue = type2.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(to, null)
where selfValue != toValue && (selfValue == null || !selfValue.Equals(toValue))
select selfValue;
return !unequalProperties.Any();
}
return self == null && to == null;
}
sometimes you don't want to compare all public properties and want to compare only the subset of them, so in this case you can just move logic to compare the desired list of properties to abstract class
public abstract class ValueObject<T> where T : ValueObject<T>
{
protected abstract IEnumerable<object> GetAttributesToIncludeInEqualityCheck();
public override bool Equals(object other)
{
return Equals(other as T);
}
public bool Equals(T other)
{
if (other == null)
{
return false;
}
return GetAttributesToIncludeInEqualityCheck()
.SequenceEqual(other.GetAttributesToIncludeInEqualityCheck());
}
public static bool operator ==(ValueObject<T> left, ValueObject<T> right)
{
return Equals(left, right);
}
public static bool operator !=(ValueObject<T> left, ValueObject<T> right)
{
return !(left == right);
}
public override int GetHashCode()
{
int hash = 17;
foreach (var obj in this.GetAttributesToIncludeInEqualityCheck())
hash = hash * 31 + (obj == null ? 0 : obj.GetHashCode());
return hash;
}
}
and use this abstract class later to compare the objects
public class Meters : ValueObject<Meters>
{
...
protected decimal DistanceInMeters { get; private set; }
...
protected override IEnumerable<object> GetAttributesToIncludeInEqualityCheck()
{
return new List<Object> { DistanceInMeters };
}
}
my solution inspired from Aras Alenin answer above where I added one level of object comparison and a custom object for comparison results. I am also interested to get property name with object name:
public static IEnumerable<ObjectPropertyChanged> GetPublicSimplePropertiesChanged<T>(this T previous, T proposedChange,
string[] namesOfPropertiesToBeIgnored) where T : class
{
return GetPublicGenericPropertiesChanged(previous, proposedChange, namesOfPropertiesToBeIgnored, true, null, null);
}
public static IReadOnlyList<ObjectPropertyChanged> GetPublicGenericPropertiesChanged<T>(this T previous, T proposedChange,
string[] namesOfPropertiesToBeIgnored) where T : class
{
return GetPublicGenericPropertiesChanged(previous, proposedChange, namesOfPropertiesToBeIgnored, false, null, null);
}
/// <summary>
/// Gets the names of the public properties which values differs between first and second objects.
/// Considers 'simple' properties AND for complex properties without index, get the simple properties of the children objects.
/// </summary>
/// <typeparam name="T"></typeparam>
/// <param name="previous">The previous object.</param>
/// <param name="proposedChange">The second object which should be the new one.</param>
/// <param name="namesOfPropertiesToBeIgnored">The names of the properties to be ignored.</param>
/// <param name="simpleTypeOnly">if set to <c>true</c> consider simple types only.</param>
/// <param name="parentTypeString">The parent type string. Meant only for recursive call with simpleTypeOnly set to <c>true</c>.</param>
/// <param name="secondType">when calling recursively, the current type of T must be clearly defined here, as T will be more generic (using base class).</param>
/// <returns>
/// the names of the properties
/// </returns>
private static IReadOnlyList<ObjectPropertyChanged> GetPublicGenericPropertiesChanged<T>(this T previous, T proposedChange,
string[] namesOfPropertiesToBeIgnored, bool simpleTypeOnly, string parentTypeString, Type secondType) where T : class
{
List<ObjectPropertyChanged> propertiesChanged = new List<ObjectPropertyChanged>();
if (previous != null && proposedChange != null)
{
var type = secondType == null ? typeof(T) : secondType;
string typeStr = parentTypeString + type.Name + ".";
var ignoreList = namesOfPropertiesToBeIgnored.CreateList();
IEnumerable<IEnumerable<ObjectPropertyChanged>> genericPropertiesChanged =
from pi in type.GetProperties(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance)
where !ignoreList.Contains(pi.Name) && pi.GetIndexParameters().Length == 0
&& (!simpleTypeOnly || simpleTypeOnly && pi.PropertyType.IsSimpleType())
let firstValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(previous, null)
let secondValue = type.GetProperty(pi.Name).GetValue(proposedChange, null)
where firstValue != secondValue && (firstValue == null || !firstValue.Equals(secondValue))
let subPropertiesChanged = simpleTypeOnly || pi.PropertyType.IsSimpleType()
? null
: GetPublicGenericPropertiesChanged(firstValue, secondValue, namesOfPropertiesToBeIgnored, true, typeStr, pi.PropertyType)
let objectPropertiesChanged = subPropertiesChanged != null && subPropertiesChanged.Count() > 0
? subPropertiesChanged
: (new ObjectPropertyChanged(proposedChange.ToString(), typeStr + pi.Name, firstValue.ToStringOrNull(), secondValue.ToStringOrNull())).CreateList()
select objectPropertiesChanged;
if (genericPropertiesChanged != null)
{ // get items from sub lists
genericPropertiesChanged.ForEach(a => propertiesChanged.AddRange(a));
}
}
return propertiesChanged;
}
Using the following class to store comparison results
[System.Serializable]
public class ObjectPropertyChanged
{
public ObjectPropertyChanged(string objectId, string propertyName, string previousValue, string changedValue)
{
ObjectId = objectId;
PropertyName = propertyName;
PreviousValue = previousValue;
ProposedChangedValue = changedValue;
}
public string ObjectId { get; set; }
public string PropertyName { get; set; }
public string PreviousValue { get; set; }
public string ProposedChangedValue { get; set; }
}
And a sample unit test:
[TestMethod()]
public void GetPublicGenericPropertiesChangedTest1()
{
// Define objects to test
Function func1 = new Function { Id = 1, Description = "func1" };
Function func2 = new Function { Id = 2, Description = "func2" };
FunctionAssignment funcAss1 = new FunctionAssignment
{
Function = func1,
Level = 1
};
FunctionAssignment funcAss2 = new FunctionAssignment
{
Function = func2,
Level = 2
};
// Main test: read properties changed
var propertiesChanged = Utils.GetPublicGenericPropertiesChanged(funcAss1, funcAss2, null);
Assert.IsNotNull(propertiesChanged);
Assert.IsTrue(propertiesChanged.Count == 3);
Assert.IsTrue(propertiesChanged[0].PropertyName == "FunctionAssignment.Function.Description");
Assert.IsTrue(propertiesChanged[1].PropertyName == "FunctionAssignment.Function.Id");
Assert.IsTrue(propertiesChanged[2].PropertyName == "FunctionAssignment.Level");
}

Categories