We Keep Coding

Assigning methods to object at run-time - Design Pattern

I have created an architecture in my C# code which does exactly what I want, but seems it would be very difficult to maintain in the long-run and am hoping there's a design pattern / better architecture I could be pointed towards.
I have created an object Test which, again, does exactly what I need perfectly which has the following structure:
class Test
{
public static Dictionary<string, Func<Test, object>> MethodDictionary;
public double Var1;
public double Var2;
private Lazy<object> _test1;
public object Test1 { get { return _test1.Value; } }
private Lazy<object> _test2;
public object Test2 { get { return _test2.Value; } }
public Test()
{
_test1 = new Lazy<object>(() => MethodDictionary["Test1"](this), true);
_test2 = new Lazy<object>(() => MethodDictionary["Test2"](this), true);
}
}
What this allows me to do is, at run-time to assign a dictionary of functions to my Test object and the 2 properties Test1 & Test2 will use the functions loaded into it to return values.
The implementation looking somewhat as follows:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Dictionary<string, Func<Test, object>> MethodDictionary = new Dictionary<string,Func<Test,object>>();
MethodDictionary.Add("Test1", TestMethod1);
MethodDictionary.Add("Test2", TestMethod2);
Test.MethodDictionary = MethodDictionary;
var x = new Test() { Var1 = 20, Var2 = 30 };
Console.WriteLine(x.Test1.ToString());
Console.WriteLine(x.Test2.ToString());
Console.ReadKey();
}
private static object TestMethod1(Test t)
{ return t.Var1 + t.Var2; }
private static object TestMethod2(Test t)
{ return t.Var1 - t.Var2; }
}
And it works great and has proven very efficient for large sets of Test objects.
My challenge is that if I ever want to add in a new method to my Test class, I need to add in the:
private Lazy<object> _myNewMethod;
public object MyNewMethod { get { return _myNewMethod.Value; } }
Update the constuctor with the key to look for in the dictionary
And, although that is pretty simple, I'd love to have a 1-line add-in (maybe some form of custom object) or have the properties read directly form the dictionary without any need for defining them at all.
Any ideas? ANY help would be great!!!
Thanks!!!

One of the ways in which you could achieve your desired behavior, is to use something that resembles a miniature IoC framework for field injection, tuned to your specific use case.
To make things easier, allow less typing in your concrete classes and make things type-safe, we introduce the LazyField type:
public class LazyField<T>
{
private static readonly Lazy<T> Default = new Lazy<T>();
private readonly Lazy<T> _lazy;
public LazyField() : this(Default) { }
public LazyField(Lazy<T> lazy)
{
_lazy = lazy;
}
public override string ToString()
{
return _lazy.Value.ToString();
}
public static implicit operator T(LazyField<T> instance)
{
return instance._lazy.Value;
}
}
Furthermore, we define an abstract base class, that ensures that these fields will be created at construction time:
public abstract class AbstractLazyFieldHolder
{
protected AbstractLazyFieldHolder()
{
LazyFields.BuildUp(this); // ensures fields are populated.
}
}
Skipping for a moment how this is achieved (explained further below), this allows the following way of defining your Test class:
public class Test : AbstractLazyFieldHolder
{
public double Var1;
public double Var2;
public readonly LazyField<double> Test1;
public readonly LazyField<double> Test2;
}
Note that these fields are immutable, initialized in the constructor. Now, for your usage example, the below snippet shows the "new way" of doing this:
LazyFields.Configure<Test>()
// We can use a type-safe lambda
.SetProvider(x => x.Test1, inst => inst.Var1 + inst.Var2)
// Or the field name.
.SetProvider("Test2", TestMethod2);
var x = new Test() { Var1 = 20, Var2 = 30 };
Console.WriteLine(x.Test1);
double test2Val = x.Test2; // type-safe conversion
Console.WriteLine(test2Val);
// Output:
// 50
// -10
The class below provides the services that support the configuration and injection of these field value.
public static class LazyFields
{
private static readonly ConcurrentDictionary<Type, IBuildUp> _registry = new ConcurrentDictionary<Type,IBuildUp>();
public interface IConfigureType<T> where T : class
{
IConfigureType<T> SetProvider<FT>(string fieldName, Func<T, FT> provider);
IConfigureType<T> SetProvider<F, FT>(Expression<Func<T, F>> fieldExpression, Func<T, FT> provider) where F : LazyField<FT>;
}
public static void BuildUp(object instance)
{
System.Diagnostics.Debug.Assert(instance != null);
var builder = _registry.GetOrAdd(instance.GetType(), BuildInitializer);
builder.BuildUp(instance);
}
public static IConfigureType<T> Configure<T>() where T : class
{
return (IConfigureType<T>)_registry.GetOrAdd(typeof(T), BuildInitializer);
}
private interface IBuildUp
{
void BuildUp(object instance);
}
private class TypeCfg<T> : IBuildUp, IConfigureType<T> where T : class
{
private readonly List<FieldInfo> _fields;
private readonly Dictionary<string, Action<T>> _initializers;
public TypeCfg()
{
_fields = typeof(T)
.GetFields(BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public)
.Where(IsLazyField)
.ToList();
_initializers = _fields.ToDictionary(x => x.Name, BuildDefaultSetter);
}
public IConfigureType<T> SetProvider<FT>(string fieldName, Func<T,FT> provider)
{
var pi = _fields.First(x => x.Name == fieldName);
_initializers[fieldName] = BuildSetter<FT>(pi, provider);
return this;
}
public IConfigureType<T> SetProvider<F,FT>(Expression<Func<T,F>> fieldExpression, Func<T,FT> provider)
where F : LazyField<FT>
{
return SetProvider((fieldExpression.Body as MemberExpression).Member.Name, provider);
}
public void BuildUp(object instance)
{
var typedInstance = (T)instance;
foreach (var initializer in _initializers.Values)
initializer(typedInstance);
}
private bool IsLazyField(FieldInfo fi)
{
return fi.FieldType.IsGenericType && fi.FieldType.GetGenericTypeDefinition() == typeof(LazyField<>);
}
private Action<T> BuildDefaultSetter(FieldInfo fi)
{
var itemType = fi.FieldType.GetGenericArguments()[0];
var defValue = Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(LazyField<>).MakeGenericType(itemType));
return (inst) => fi.SetValue(inst, defValue);
}
private Action<T> BuildSetter<FT>(FieldInfo fi, Func<T, FT> provider)
{
return (inst) => fi.SetValue(inst, new LazyField<FT>(new Lazy<FT>(() => provider(inst))));
}
}
private static IBuildUp BuildInitializer(Type targetType)
{
return (IBuildUp)Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(TypeCfg<>).MakeGenericType(targetType));
}
}

Look at library https://github.com/ekonbenefits/impromptu-interface.
With it and using DynamicObject i wrote sample code that shows how to simplify adding new methods:
public class Methods
{
public Methods()
{
MethodDictionary = new Dictionary<string, Func<ITest, object>>();
LazyObjects = new Dictionary<string, Lazy<object>>();
}
public Dictionary<string, Func<ITest, object>> MethodDictionary { get; private set; }
public Dictionary<string, Lazy<object>> LazyObjects { get; private set; }
}
public class Proxy : DynamicObject
{
Methods _methods;
public Proxy()
{
_methods = new Methods();
}
public override bool TryGetMember(GetMemberBinder binder, out object result)
{
result = _methods.LazyObjects[binder.Name].Value;
return true;
}
public override bool TrySetMember(SetMemberBinder binder, object value)
{
_methods.MethodDictionary[binder.Name] = (Func<ITest, object>)value;
_methods.LazyObjects[binder.Name] = new Lazy<object>(() => _methods.MethodDictionary[binder.Name](this.ActLike<ITest>()), true);
return true;
}
}
//now you can add new methods by add single method to interface
public interface ITest
{
object Test1 { get; set; }
object Test2 { get; set; }
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var x = new Proxy().ActLike<ITest>();
x.Test1 = new Func<ITest, object>((y) => "Test1");
x.Test2 = new Func<ITest, object>((y) => "Test2");
Console.WriteLine(x.Test1);
Console.WriteLine(x.Test2);
}
}

I don't know what you are trying to do, but I think you can use a simpler approach like this:
class Test
{
public static Dictionary<string, Func<Test, object>> MethodDictionary;
public double Var1;
public double Var2;
}
Calling the function is simple:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Dictionary<string, Func<Test, object>> MethodDictionary = new Dictionary<string,Func<Test,object>>();
MethodDictionary.Add("Test1", TestMethod1);
MethodDictionary.Add("Test2", TestMethod2);
Test.MethodDictionary = MethodDictionary;
var x = new Test() { Var1 = 20, Var2 = 30 };
Console.WriteLine(Test.MethodDictionary["Test1"](x).ToString());
Console.WriteLine(Test.MethodDictionary["Test2"](x).ToString());
Console.ReadKey();
}

Get name of a property and declaring class

How can I use reflection to get the name and declaring class of a property of a generic type. The purpose is to get an exception if I read a property where nothing has been written so far. One of the problems is that the check must be independent of the declaring class.
value.GetType().DeclaringType is always null.
using System;
namespace TestCodeContract
{
public struct CheckForNull<T> where T : struct
{
private T? backingField;
public static implicit operator T(CheckForNull<T> value)
{
if (!(value.backingField.HasValue))
{
var t1 = value.GetType().DeclaringType; // always null.
var propertyName = "Delta"; // TODO get from Reflection
var className = "ContractClass"; // TODO get from Reflection
var msg = String.Format("Proprety '{0}' in class '{1}' is not initialized", propertyName, className);
throw new ApplicationException(msg);
}
return value.backingField.Value;
}
public static implicit operator CheckForNull<T>(T value)
{
return new CheckForNull<T> { backingField = value };
}
}
public class ContractClass
{
public CheckForNull<int> Delta { get; set; }
public void Test1()
{
int x = Delta; // Wanted: "Property 'Delta' in class 'ContractClass' is not initialized"
}
}
}

No, you can't do it like that. I would suggest something like this instead:
// You could do this without the constraint, with a bit of extra work.
public class ReadOnlyAfterWrite<T> where T : struct
{
private T? value;
private readonly string property;
private readonly string type;
public ReadOnlyAfterWrite(string property, string type)
{
this.property = property;
this.type = type;
}
public T Value
{
get
{
if (value == null)
{
// Use type and property here
throw new InvalidOperationException(...);
}
return (T) value;
}
set { this.value = value; }
}
}
public class ContractClass
{
// This is what I'd do in C# 6. Before that, probably just use string literals.
private readonly ReadOnlyAfterWrite<int> delta =
new ReadOnlyAfterWrite(nameof(Delta), nameof(ContractClass));
public int Delta
{
get { return delta.Value; }
set { delta.Value = value; }
}
}
While it's not terribly clean in implementation, I think it's a better public API - the fact that it's guarded is invisible to the caller, who just sees an int property.

Overridable methods cannot be static: How else can I do what I'm trying to do?

I have a series of static classes that I use to get strings for enum values. They all look something like this:
public static class MyEnumToString
{
private static Dictionary<MyEnum, string> map
= new Dictionary<MyEnum, string>();
public static string Get(MyEnum type)
{
PopulateEmptyMap();
return map[type];
}
static void PopulateEmptyMap()
{
if (!map.Any())
{
PopulateMap();
}
}
private static void PopulateMap()
{
map[MyEnum.enum1] = "string for enum 1";
map[MyEnum.enum2] = "string for enum 2";
}
}
I have multiple classes like this, that differ in the Enum type they use, and the string values. Clearly, I should combine the classes to reduce duplicated code.
What I tried doing was create generic base class so that it can handle any type, then implement the PopulateMap for the inherited classes. If it were possible, it would look something like this:
public static class TypeToString<TType>
{
public static Dictionary<TType, string> map
= new Dictionary<TType, string>();
public static string Get(TType type)
{
PopulateEmptyMap();
return map[type];
}
static void PopulateEmptyMap()
{
if (!map.Any())
{
PopulateMap();
}
}
public abstract static void PopulateMap();
}
public static class MyEnumToString: TypeToString<MyEnum>
{
public static void PopulateMap()
{
map[MyEnum.enum1] = "string for enum 1";
map[MyEnum.enum2] = "string for enum 2";
}
}
I had to make the Dictionary and the method PopulateMap public, because apparently generic classes cannot have protected or protected-internal members. Having to make that public isn't ideal, but not a deal-breaker.
What I am getting hung up on is the fact that "overridable methods cannot be static", so my PopulateMap method cannot be both abstract and static. And if it's not static, it can't be called from other static methods. And if it's not abstract, then the inheriting classes' PopulateMap doesn't get called.
This version doesn't even build.
Is there any way to do what I'm trying to do and still keep my class static? I'd really like to avoid having to have an instantiated TypeToString object every time I want to call TypeToString.Get().

Here's a handy extension method, as I'm guessing you're trying to map some description text to an enum value:
public static class EnumExtensions
{
public static string GetDescription(this Enum value)
{
var field = value.GetType().GetField(value.ToString());
if (field == null)
return value.ToString();
var attribute = field.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(DescriptionAttribute), false)
.OfType<DescriptionAttribute>()
.SingleOrDefault();
return attribute != null
? attribute.Description
: value.ToString();
}
}
Use it like this:
public enum Foo
{
[Description("Hello")]
Bar,
[Description("World")]
Baz
}
var value = Foo.Bar;
var description = value.GetDescription(); // Hello
Depending on your needs, you could cache the descriptions if reflection proves to be too slow for you, just modify the GetDescription method.
EDIT: to account for the additional info in the comment.
As it looks like you need something more extensible, you could use a custom attribute:
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Field, AllowMultiple = true, Inherited = false)]
public sealed class DescriptionEntryAttribute : Attribute
{
public string Key { get; private set; }
public string Value { get; private set; }
public DescriptionEntryAttribute(string key, string value)
{
Key = key;
Value = value;
}
}
Which would let you to do this:
public enum Foo
{
[DescriptionEntry("Name", "Hello")]
[DescriptionEntry("Title", "Some title")]
Bar,
[DescriptionEntry("Name", "World")]
[DescriptionEntry("Title", "Some title")]
Baz
}
Now, to read this thing, I'd advise you to store it in a cache like that:
public static class EnumExtensions
{
private static readonly ConcurrentDictionary<Type, DescriptionCache> Caches = new ConcurrentDictionary<Type, DescriptionCache>();
public static string GetDescription(this Enum value, string key)
{
var enumType = value.GetType();
var cache = Caches.GetOrAdd(enumType, type => new DescriptionCache(type));
return cache.GetDescription(value, key);
}
public static IEnumerable<TEnum> GetValuesFromDescription<TEnum>(string key, string description)
where TEnum : struct
{
var cache = Caches.GetOrAdd(typeof(TEnum), type => new DescriptionCache(type));
return cache.GetValues(key, description).Select(value => (TEnum)(object)value);
}
private class DescriptionCache
{
private readonly ILookup<Enum, Tuple<string, string>> _items;
private readonly ILookup<Tuple<string, string>, Enum> _reverse;
public DescriptionCache(Type enumType)
{
if (!enumType.IsEnum)
throw new ArgumentException("Not an enum");
_items = (from value in Enum.GetValues(enumType).Cast<Enum>()
let field = enumType.GetField(value.ToString())
where field != null
from attribute in field.GetCustomAttributes(typeof (DescriptionEntryAttribute), false).OfType<DescriptionEntryAttribute>()
select new {value, key = attribute.Key, description = attribute.Value})
.ToLookup(i => i.value, i => Tuple.Create(i.key, i.description));
_reverse = (from grp in _items
from description in grp
select new {value = grp.Key, description})
.ToLookup(i => i.description, i => i.value);
}
public string GetDescription(Enum value, string key)
{
var tuple = _items[value].FirstOrDefault(i => i.Item1 == key);
return tuple != null ? tuple.Item2 : null;
}
public IEnumerable<Enum> GetValues(string key, string description)
{
return _reverse[Tuple.Create(key, description)];
}
}
}
This way:
Foo.Bar.GetDescription("Name") returns "Hello"
EnumExtensions.GetValuesFromDescription<Foo>("Title", "Some title") returns a sequence containing Foo.Bar and Foo.Baz
That should be enough to get you started, now you should tweak it to your needs. For instance, you could use an enum instead of a string for the keys, it would help avoid typing mistakes, but I don't know if this would suit your needs.

Your problem is that static methods and variables are essentially not inherited. They are variables that don't act on instances of the class themselves, but provide some functionality to the class.
So you have a bunch of different enums, and you want to populate them based on different stuff. So let's look at what parts you have, and what is common:
PopulateMap: Not common
Enum type: Not common
Storage variable: Common
Populate Map if empty: Common
So all you really want is a way to populate the map once, when it's used. There is already a class for this, it's called Lazy. Using that, the code becomes:
public abstract class TypeToString<Type>
{
protected TypeToString()
{
storage = new Lazy<Dictionary<Type, string>>(GetMap);
}
private Lazy<Dictionary<Type, string>> storage;
protected abstract Dictionary<Type, string> GetMap();
public string Get(Type t) {return storage.Value[t];}
}
public class MyEnumToString : TypeToString<MyEnum>
{
protected override Dictionary<MyEnum, string> GetMap()
{
return null;
}
public static Get(MyEnum e) { return new MyEnumToString.Get(e); }
}
Alternatively, you can decorate your enums with a [DescriptionAttribute] and then create a method to get the description of a specific enum. This is what I did when I was faced with a similar problem. (Be sure to cache the results for the enum, as it used reflection which was slow.)

Using a delegate for value transformation

I want to develop a basic class that holds a string value and I want to pass a transformation rule how this value should be stored as an int value.
When I'm not completely wrong this should be possible using some kind of delegate. Unfortunately I have no idea how to begin and what to search the internet for.
Here a simple example:
class MyClass
{
public string InputString { get; private set; }
public int OutputValue { get; set; }
public MyClass(string inputString)
{
this.InputString = inputString;
}
//I suspect that I need a method here taking some kind of delegate?
}
MyClass mC = new MyClass("abcd");
//here I now want to pass something to mC saying that each character should
// be transformed to its ascii value and be added to a total value
//or another object should transform abcd interpreting it hexadecimal

You want something like a Func<string, int>:
Func<string, int> converter = (theString) => int.Parse(theString);
Then have your type take a Func<string, int>, possibly in the constructor, and call it when you need to convert:
converter(InputString);
The implementation of this delegate can be whatever you like, so long as it takes a string and returns an int.
A possible way (not demonstrating specifically the ASCII value of each character):
class MyClass
{
private Func<string, int> _valueConverter;
public string InputString { get; private set; }
public int OutputValue { get { return _valueConverter(InputString); } }
public MyClass(string inputString, Func<string, int> valueConverter)
{
_valueConverter = valueConverter;
this.InputString = inputString;
}
}
// As a lambda
MyClass mC = new MyClass("2", input => int.Parse(input));
You can supply something to fulfil the Func parameter as either a lambda expression as I show above, or a method group:
private static int AMethodThatMatchesTheFuncSignature(string value)
{
return 42;
}
var mC = new MyClass("2", AMethodThatMatchesTheFuncSignature);
If you have never seen it before, Func<T1, T2> is just a pre-made delegate provided by the framework (there are loads of Func and Action types defined for no arguments up to many arguments. Action all return void and Func all return the final defined type TResult).

You may add a Transform method that takes a delegate and apply on InputString:
class MyClass
{
public string InputString { get; private set; }
public int OutputValue { get; set; }
public MyClass(string inputString)
{
this.InputString = inputString;
}
public void Transform(Func<string, int> f){
OutputValue = f(InputString);
}
}
MyClass mC = new MyClass("abcd");
mC.Transform(c=> c.Sum(c=> ((int)c));//OutputValue is changed
mC.Transform(c=> (int)c.Average(c=> ((int)c));//OutputValue is changed

You can also use the design pattern "strategy" to "delegate" the implementation of an algorithm.
(Without error handling)
interface IConverter
{
int Convert(string value);
}
class ASCIConverter : IConverter
{
public int Convert(string value)
{
//conversion implementation here
}
}
class MyClass
{
string Input;
IConverter Converter;
public MyClass(string input, IConverter converter)
{
this.Input = input;
this.Converter = converter;
}
public int GetConvertedValue()
{
return this.Converter.Convert(this.Input);
}
}
[Edit]
From calling code:
MyClass myClass = new MyClass("abcd",new ASCIConverter());
int intRepresentation = myClass.GetConvertedValue();

Duck Typing DynamicObject derivate

I wrote a class that allows a derivate to specify which of its properties can be lazy loaded. The code is:
public abstract class SelfHydratingEntity<T> : DynamicObject where T : class {
private readonly Dictionary<string, LoadableBackingField> fields;
public SelfHydratingEntity(T original) {
this.Original = original;
this.fields = this.GetBackingFields().ToDictionary(f => f.Name);
}
public T Original { get; private set; }
protected virtual IEnumerable<LoadableBackingField> GetBackingFields() {
yield break;
}
public override bool TryGetMember(GetMemberBinder binder, out object result) {
LoadableBackingField field;
if (this.fields.TryGetValue(binder.Name, out field)) {
result = field.GetValue();
return true;
} else {
var getter = PropertyAccessor.GetGetter(this.Original.GetType(), binder.Name);
result = getter(this.Original);
return true;
}
}
public override bool TrySetMember(SetMemberBinder binder, object value) {
LoadableBackingField field;
if (this.fields.TryGetValue(binder.Name, out field)) {
field.SetValue(value);
return true;
} else {
var setter = PropertyAccessor.GetSetter(this.Original.GetType(), binder.Name);
setter(this.Original, value);
return true;
}
}
}
And a derivate class:
public class SelfHydratingPerson : SelfHydratingEntity<IPerson> {
private readonly IDataRepository dataRepository;
public SelfHydratingDerivate(IDataRepository dataRepository, IPerson person)
: base(person) {
this.dataRepository = dataRepository
}
protected override IEnumerable<LoadableBackingField> GetBackingFields() {
yield return new LoadableBackingField("Address", () => this.dataRepository.Addresses.Get(this.Original.AddressID));
}
}
This works perfectly fine for getting and settings property values, but I get a either a RuntimeBinderException when I implicitly cast or an InvalidCastException with an explicitly cast SelfHydratingEntity back to T.
I know that you can override the DynamicObject.TryConvert method, but I'm wondering what exactly to put in this method. I've read a lot about duck typing today, and have tried out several libraries, but none of them work for this particular scenario. All of the libraries I've tried today generate a wrapper class using Reflection.Emit that makes calls to "get_" and "set_" methods and naturally use reflection to find these methods on the wrapped instance. SelfHydratingEntity of course doesn't have the "get_" and "set_" methods defined.
So, I'm wondering if this kind of thing is even possible. Is there any way to cast an instance of SelfHydratingEntity to T? I'm looking for something like this:
var original = GetOriginalPerson();
dynamic person = new SelfHydratingPerson(new DataRepository(), original);
string name = person.Name; // Gets property value on original
var address = person.Address; // Gets property value using LoadableBackingField registration
var iPerson = (IPerson)person;
- or -
var iPerson = DuckType.As<IPerson>(person);

Have you seen this Duck Typing project. It looks pretty good. I have just found a great example from Mauricio. It uses the Windsor Castle dynamic proxy to intercept method calls
Using the code from Mauricio the following code works like a dream
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
dynamic person = new { Name = "Peter" };
var p = DuckType.As<IPerson>(person);
Console.WriteLine(p.Name);
}
}
public interface IPerson
{
string Name { get; set; }
}
public static class DuckType
{
private static readonly ProxyGenerator generator = new ProxyGenerator();
public static T As<T>(object o)
{
return generator.CreateInterfaceProxyWithoutTarget<T>(new DuckTypingInterceptor(o));
}
}
public class DuckTypingInterceptor : IInterceptor
{
private readonly object target;
public DuckTypingInterceptor(object target)
{
this.target = target;
}
public void Intercept(IInvocation invocation)
{
var methods = target.GetType().GetMethods()
.Where(m => m.Name == invocation.Method.Name)
.Where(m => m.GetParameters().Length == invocation.Arguments.Length)
.ToList();
if (methods.Count > 1)
throw new ApplicationException(string.Format("Ambiguous method match for '{0}'", invocation.Method.Name));
if (methods.Count == 0)
throw new ApplicationException(string.Format("No method '{0}' found", invocation.Method.Name));
var method = methods[0];
if (invocation.GenericArguments != null && invocation.GenericArguments.Length > 0)
method = method.MakeGenericMethod(invocation.GenericArguments);
invocation.ReturnValue = method.Invoke(target, invocation.Arguments);
}
}

impromptu-interface
https://github.com/ekonbenefits/impromptu-interface
Can static cast interfaces onto objects derived from DynamicObject.