Look at the following example (partially taken from MSDN Blog):
class Animal { }
class Giraffe : Animal { }
static void Main(string[] args)
{
// Array assignment works, but...
Animal[] animals = new Giraffe[10];
// implicit...
List<Animal> animalsList = new List<Giraffe>();
// ...and explicit casting fails
List<Animal> animalsList2 = (List<Animal>) new List<Giraffe>();
}
Is this a covariance problem? Will this be supported in the future C# release and are there any clever workarounds (using only .NET 2.0)?
C programming language is a machine-independent programming language that is mainly used to create many types of applications and operating systems such as Windows, and other complicated programs such as the Oracle database, Git, Python interpreter, and games and is considered a programming foundation in the process of ...
What is C? C is a general-purpose programming language created by Dennis Ritchie at the Bell Laboratories in 1972. It is a very popular language, despite being old. C is strongly associated with UNIX, as it was developed to write the UNIX operating system.
In the real sense it has no meaning or full form. It was developed by Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson at AT&T bell Lab. First, they used to call it as B language then later they made some improvement into it and renamed it as C and its superscript as C++ which was invented by Dr.
Compared to other languages—like Java, PHP, or C#—C is a relatively simple language to learn for anyone just starting to learn computer programming because of its limited number of keywords.
Well this certainly won't be supported in C# 4. There's a fundamental problem:
List<Giraffe> giraffes = new List<Giraffe>();
giraffes.Add(new Giraffe());
List<Animal> animals = giraffes;
animals.Add(new Lion()); // Aargh!
Keep giraffes safe: just say no to unsafe variance.
The array version works because arrays do support reference type variance, with execution time checking. The point of generics is to provide compile-time type safety.
In C# 4 there will be support for safe generic variance, but only for interfaces and delegates. So you'll be able to do:
Func<string> stringFactory = () => "always return this string";
Func<object> objectFactory = stringFactory; // Safe, allowed in C# 4
Func<out T>
is covariant in T
because T
is only used in an output position. Compare that with Action<in T>
which is contravariant in T
because T
is only used in an input position there, making this safe:
Action<object> objectAction = x => Console.WriteLine(x.GetHashCode());
Action<string> stringAction = objectAction; // Safe, allowed in C# 4
IEnumerable<out T>
is covariant as well, making this correct in C# 4, as pointed out by others:
IEnumerable<Animal> animals = new List<Giraffe>();
// Can't add a Lion to animals, as `IEnumerable<out T>` is a read-only interface.
In terms of working around this in your situation in C# 2, do you need to maintain one list, or would you be happy creating a new list? If that's acceptable, List<T>.ConvertAll
is your friend.
It will work in C#4 for IEnumerable<T>
, so you can do:
IEnumerable<Animal> animals = new List<Giraffe>();
However List<T>
is not a covarient projection, so you cannot assign lists as you have done above since you could do this:
List<Animal> animals = new List<Giraffe>();
animals.Add(new Monkey());
Which is clearly not valid.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With