I have used the dynamic and the object type interchangeably. Is there any difference between these two types? Is there any performance implications of using one over the other? Which one of these is more flexible?
Object is useful when we don't have more information about the data type. Dynamic is useful when we need to code using reflection or dynamic languages or with the COM objects and when getting result out of the LinQ queries.
Dynamic objects expose members such as properties and methods at run time, instead of at compile time. This enables you to create objects to work with structures that do not match a static type or format.
Dynamic data types are dynamic in nature and don't require initialization at the time of declaration. It also means that a dynamic type does not have a predefined type and can be used to store any type of data. We can define this data type using the keyword “dynamic" in our code.
Dynamic typing is when a language requires the variable to be initialized. eg. So, because Java requires a local variable to be definitely assigned before it is used, it is not statically typed? I think you mean to say that a static type system requires a type to be specified for each variable in its declaration.
They're hugely different.
If you use dynamic
you're opting into dynamic typing, and thus opting out of compile-time checking for the most part. And yes, it's less performant than using static typing where you can use static typing.
However, you can't do much with the object
type anyway - it has hardly any members. Where do you find yourself using it? When you want to write general purpose code which can work with a variety of types, you should usually consider generics rather than object
.
With the advancement in C# language, we have seen the dynamic and object types. Here are the two types, as I learned by comparing these 7 points:
Object
Dynamic
Hopefully, this would help somebody.
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