I'm developing an application where I the need to invoke a method of a generic class and I don't care about the instances actual type. Something like the following Java code:
public class Item<T>{ private T item; public doSomething(){...} } ... public void processItems(Item<?>[] items){ for(Item<?> item : items) item.doSomething(); }
At the time I was on a hurry, so I solved my problem by defining a interface with the methods I needed to invoke and made the generic class implement it.
public interface IItem { void doSomething(); } public class Item<T> : IItem { private T item; public void doSomething(){...} } ... public void processItems(IItem[] items) { foreach(IItem item in items) item.doSomething(); }
This workaround works fine, but I'd like to know what is the correct way to achieve the same behavior.
EDIT:
I forgot to refer that the caller of processItems
doesn't know the actual types. Actually the idea was that the array passed as argument to processItems
could contain intermixed types. Since its not possible to have such an array in .Net, using a non generic base class or interface seems to be the only way.
In the Java programming language, the wildcard ? is a special kind of type argument that controls the type safety of the use of generic (parameterized) types. It can be used in variable declarations and instantiations as well as in method definitions, but not in the definition of a generic type.
Wildcards in Java are basically the question marks which we use in generic programming, it basically represents the unknown type. We use Java Wildcard widely in situations such as in a type of parameter, local variable, or field and also as a return type.
Due to extensive capture conversion, in most places, compiler treats wildcards as if they are type variables. Therefore indeed programmer can replace wildcard with type variables in such places, a sort of manual capture conversion.
The normal way to do this would be to make the method generic:
public void ProcessItems<T>(Item<T>[] items) { foreach(Item<T> item in items) item.DoSomething(); }
Assuming the caller knows the type, type inference should mean that they don't have to explicitly specify it. For example:
Item<int> items = new Item<int>(); // And then populate... processor.ProcessItems(items);
Having said that, creating a non-generic interface specifying the type-agnostic operations can be useful as well. It will very much depend on your exact use case.
I see that you only want to invoke some method with no parameters... there's already a contract for that: Action
.
public void processItems(IEnumerable<Action> actions) { foreach(Action t in actions) t(); }
Client:
List<Animal> zoo = GetZoo(); List<Action> thingsToDo = new List<Action>(); // thingsToDo.AddRange(zoo .OfType<Elephant>() .Select<Elephant, Action>(e => e.Trumpet)); thingsToDo.AddRange(zoo .OfType<Lion>() .Select<Lion, Action>(l => l.Roar)); thingsToDo.AddRange(zoo .OfType<Monkey>() .Select<Monkey, Action>(m => m.ThrowPoo)); // processItems(thingsToDo);
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