I'm familiar with constructing and calling generic methods through reflection, but for some reason, constructing a generic delegate through reflection is tying my brain in knots!
Perhaps it's because the delegate in particular is not the most simple. This isn't specifically a MongoDb question, but in my case what I'm trying to do is register a class map as a root class where the type is in a type variable because I've only just found it out (not fed in generically).
Ultimately, the method I need to call looks like this:
BsonClassMap.RegisterClassMap<T>(Action<BsonClassMap<T>> classMapInitializer)
So in cases where the class I'm mapping isn't a root class, I don't need to pass the delegate, so the code is pretty straightforward:
MethodInfo method = typeof(BsonClassMap).GetMethod("RegisterClassMap");
MethodInfo genericMethod = method.MakeGenericMethod(entityType);
genericMethod.Invoke(null, null);
I've checked out questions such as How can I dynamically create an Action<T> at runtime? and I understand what's going on there, but for some reason the nested generic in my case is throwing me off and I can't wrap my head around it.
I am trying to construct and invoke the equivalent of this:
BsonClassMap.RegisterClassMap<T>(cm =>
{
cm.AutoMap();
cm.SetIsRootClass(true);
});
Could someone please explain a bit more about generic delegate creation, particularly where the type in the action has a generic type argument of it's own? An example similar to what I'm trying to do would be great!
You should do exactly what the answer in the linked post did.
First, create a generic method that does the thing:
public static void Perform<T>(BsonClassMap<T> cm) {
cm.AutoMap();
cm.SetIsRootClass(true);
}
Then, get the method info of Perform:
var performMethodInfo = typeof(YourType).GetMethod("Perform").MakeGenericMethod(entityType);
Create a Type representing BsonClassMap<T> and create a Type representing Action out of it:
var typeOfBsonClassMap = typeof(BsonClassMap<>).MakeGenericType(entityType);
var typeOfAction = typeof(Action<>).MakeGenericType(typeOfBsonClassMap);
Now use Delegate.CreateDelegate:
var del = Delegate.CreateDelegate(typeOfAction, performMethodInfo);
And then you can pass it into the method:
genericMethod.Invoke(null, new object[] { del });
Related
This is very tricky and I'm stuck at the step calling the generic method (MethodInfo) which is returned by another MethodCallExpression (by using MakeGenericMethod) right inside the expression tree context.
Technically the compiled delegate I want looks like this:
Func<IEnumerable, Type, IEnumerable> cast;
So instead of using items.Cast<T>() I can call my compiled delegate like cast(items, typeof(T)).
If using reflection every time calling cast, it would be easy but here I would like to build a compiled delegate based on Expression tree. Here is my code:
public static class EnumerableExtensions {
static readonly Func<IEnumerable, IEnumerable<object>> _enumerableCast = Enumerable.Cast<object>;
static readonly Lazy<MethodInfo> _enumerableCastDefLazy = new Lazy<MethodInfo>(() => _enumerableCast.Method.GetGenericMethodDefinition());
static MethodInfo _enumerableCastDef => _enumerableCastDefLazy.Value;
static Func<Type[], MethodInfo> _makeGenericMethod = _enumerableCastDef.MakeGenericMethod;
static readonly Lazy<Func<IEnumerable, Type, IEnumerable>> _enumerableCompiledCastLazy =
new Lazy<Func<IEnumerable, Type, IEnumerable>>(() => {
var itemsParam = Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable));
var castTypeParam = Expression.Parameter(typeof(Type));
var castTypeParams = Expression.NewArrayInit(typeof(Type), castTypeParam);
var castMethod = Expression.Call(Expression.Constant(_enumerableCastDef),_makeGenericMethod.Method, castTypeParams);
//here we need to call on castMethod (a static method)
//but the Expression.Call requires a MethodInfo, not an Expression returning MethodInfo
var cast = Expression.Call(..., itemsParam);//<--------- I'm stuck here
return Expression.Lambda<Func<IEnumerable, Type, IEnumerable>>(cast, itemsParam, castTypeParam).Compile();
});
public static Func<IEnumerable, Type, IEnumerable> EnumerableCompiledCast => _enumerableCompiledCastLazy.Value;
public static IEnumerable Cast(this IEnumerable items, Type type){
return EnumerableCompiledCast(items, type);
}
}
So as you can see it's really a dead stuck, never encountered such an issue like this before. I know I can work-around it by invoking the castMethod (as a MethodCallExpression). That way I need to obtain the Invoke method of MethodInfo and use Expression.Call to call that method on the instance castMethod. But wait, if so we still use Method.Invoke as we use Reflection to write code usually without compiling it? I really believe in some hidden magic of Expression.Call which does something different (better and faster) than the MethodInfo.Invoke.
What you're trying to do is completely pointless, and very unlike Enumerable.Cast, which actually does something useful.
Let's take a look at the latter's definition:
IEnumerable<T> Cast<T>(this IEnumerable source);
This takes an untyped IEnumerable and returns a typed IEnumerable<T> based on the generic argument given to the function. You can then use the elements inside the enumerable with the proper type directly, including value types.
Now let's look at your function definition:
IEnumerable Cast(this IEnumerable items, Type type);
This takes an untyped enumerable and returns also an untyped enumerable. What it does inside isn't important, because even if it worked as you want, what you get out of this is still an enumerable of plain objects, so to use these values you still need to cast these things correctly (and unbox the boxed value types). You achieved nothing at all, you already had such a collection -- the thing you passed to your function in the first place.
Even if you make the cast work using a cache of compiled expressions, one per type, which isn't hard to do, the output is still cast back to object by your very return type.
I would like to make my code convention-based by using Types and keeping things simple, but generics has it's own complexity with it's own learning curve.
I have a bunch of POCOs (Plain Old CLR Objects) in a List that I'd like to iterate through later in the code.
var models = new List<Type>();
models.Add(typeof(Person));
models.Add(typeof(Company));
Would like to cycle through each list item:
models.ForEach(m =>
{
var label = m.FullName;
// var data = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<List<typeof(m)>>(""); // doesn't work
var data = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<List<m>>(""); // doesn't work either
...
}
The issue is that the "m" in the Deserialize line isn't working. What would be the best way to pass that through, i.e. making the 'List<m>' a 'List<T>' that we can use?
To use generics, you really need to know the Type (T) at compile time, you don't - you know it at run time. (Caveat: Its possible with reflection, but theres no need to use it when there's an overload as described below)
There is an overload of DeserializeObject which takes a Type rather than use generics. So your code would be
models.ForEach(m =>
{
var label = m.FullName;
var data = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject("",m);
...
}
However, as you've pointed out in comments you actually need a List<T> not a single T. You'll need a little bit of reflection, just to create the right type to pass to the above DeserializeObject call.
var tList = typeof(List<>); // Type of open List
models.ForEach(m =>
{
var label = m.FullName;
var tConvert = = tList.MakeGenericType(m);
var data = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject("",tConvert);
...
}
The answer to your question is above, but the more I look at it the harder it is to see what you can actually do with data. all you'll ever know about data is that it is an object. You cant cast it to anything - you wont know if its a list of Person or a list of Company.
Perhaps this was an overly contrived example you've used for a real-life problem. If not I forsee you're next problem is what to do with data!!
If you don't know the type at compile time you can do this with Reflection. Consider the following code:
models.ForEach(m =>
{
var mi = JsonConvert.GetType()
.GetMethod("DeserializeObject");
var m = mi.MakeGenericMethod(new[] { m });
// you pass [null] for the object because it's a [static] method
// and you don't have to declare [args] if you can express it simply
// but keep in mind that it's simply an object[]
m.Invoke(null, args);
}
Another solution is to call the generic method using reflection (if there isn't any overload that takes the type as parameter)
models.ForEach(m =>
{
MethodInfo method = typeof(JsonConvert).GetMethod("DeserializeObject");
MethodInfo generic = method.MakeGenericMethod(m);
generic.Invoke(null, "");
}
I am attempting to use reflection to enumerate class fields and methods in order to do some automation in a web application. I am also abstracting this so that I could pass in any class.
Is there a way I could somehow pass in the type directly to a function to enumerate on rather than an instance of the type?
I would like the caller side to look like this:
var m = new MyClass(AClassOfSomeTypeIDefined);
I would like to avoid creating an instance as that is misleading to anyone who might use the class (as the instance isn't directly used).
using System;
public void UseType(Type t) {
// do something with t using reflection techniques - e.g.
Console.WriteLine("compat with int? {0}", typeof(int).IsAssignableFrom(t));
}
Call it with C# typeof keyword and the data type you want to pass.
// Examples...
UseType( typeof(int) );
UseType( typeof(System.Int32) );
UseType( typeof(System.Windows.Controls.Button) );
UseType( typeof(IDisposable) );
UseType( typeof(WhateverTypeYouWant) );
System.Type is one of the cornerstones of reflection as you already know, so run with it.
Other notes
Depending on what you want to do with the type, the following peripheral details might be useful.
To create an instance of a Type at runtime without having used the new keyword at compile time, use the System.Activator class. e.g.
// Create a List of strings like: new List<string>();
var list = (List<string>) Activator.CreateInstance( typeof(List<string>) );
yes just use the Type of your class. There's two basic ways to get the type:
Foo foo = new Foo();
Type myType = foo.GetType();
Type myTyp2 = typeof(Foo);
You can use GetType() if you only know the type at runtime (more common with reflection), or typeof() if you know the type at compile time already.
In your example this would be i.e.
var m = new MyClass(typeof(Foo));
You can pass a Type object just like any other parameter.
class MyClass
{
public MyClass(Type yourType)
{
// do as you please with yourType
}
}
The call it:
var m = new MyClass(typeof(YourType));
This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
LINQ to SQL: Return anonymous type?
Do any one know how to return an anonymous type. I am using Linq where i need to return the following code
private <What's the return type to be provided here> SampleLinq(Int32 Num)
{
var query = (from dept in obj.DeptTable where dept.Id == Num select new { dept.DeptName, dept.DeptId });
return (query)
}
Sorry to say but you cannot return anonymous type out side the scope of method.
This is the alternate way to get anonmous type
// Method that returns anonymous type as object
object ReturnAnonymous()
{
return new { City="Prague", Name="Tomas" };
}
// Application entry-point
void Main()
{
// Get instance of anonymous type with 'City' and 'Name' properties
object o = ReturnAnonymous();
// This call to 'Cast' method converts first parameter (object) to the
// same type as the type of second parameter - which is in this case
// anonymous type with 'City' and 'Name' properties
var typed = Cast(o, new { City="", Name="" });
Console.WriteLine("Name={0}, City={1}", typed.Name, typed.City);
}
// Cast method - thanks to type inference when calling methods it
// is possible to cast object to type without knowing the type name
T Cast<T>(object obj, T type)
{
return (T)obj;
}
you can use it only for types in one assembly (two anonymous types from two different assemblies will be internally compiled to two different types that can't be converted using this trick).
Return Dynamic type:
public static dynamic getCustomer()
{
.....
var x = from c in customers
select new {Fname = c.FirstName};
return x;
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
dynamic x = getCustomer();
Console.WriteLine(Enumerable.First(x).Fname);
Console.ReadKey();
}
you can't do that. that is why it is called anonymous. It doesn't have a name. But you always can cast it to object
Well, you can't actually do that, but here's a hack on this.
private object SampleLinq(Int32 Num)
{
return (from dept in obj.DeptTable where dept.Id == Num select new { dept.DeptName, dept.DeptId });
}
You can't return an Anonymous Type from a method.
You can create a simple Class to wrap the Anonymous Type, but you still need a Class (or cast to object).
Keep in mind, though, that if you cast to object there's no way to cast back. You'll need reflection to read any data.
The answers you see from the hack is a lot of work just to get an anonymous type through a method boundary. You shouldn't be doing this. If you need to pass something back from a method, you should be passing concrete types.
It depends what you looking to do with the return vale.
If your going to bind it in the UI
you can just rerun
IEnumerable or IQueryable.
If your going to use reflection on the return value just return type object
If your using c# 4.0 you can return a
dynamic type
If your using EF or Linq to SQL to further join a query comprised of your anonymous type you
can make a concrete class instead and
use the concrete placeholder
technique. For more details on this
technique I can give some assistance.
As others have mentioned though, you should really question whether returning an anonymous type form a method is the best way to solve the problem at hand. In general there is usually a better more pattern based approach that may require a bit more coding up front but may resulting in a more elegant design. This being said, I do believe there are legitimate cases such as with data binding where returning anonymous type instances can be perfectly acceptable.
UPDATE:
Just an interested tidbit I wanted to share in case those reading are not aware. Anonymous types are unique per their property names and types so lets say you have method A and method B in in both you create an anonymous type that has a single string typed property called Name by doing something like be code below.
public object A()
{
return new { Name = "Cid" }
}
public object B()
{
return new { Name = "Galuf" }
}
public void Test()
{
System.Diagnostics.Trace.Assert(A().GetType() == B().GetType());
}
Now even though this type is defined in two separate places the compiler only creates only creates a single shared type because they both have the same set of properties as defined by the property types and property names. In this respect the properties can be thought of as sort of a signature for the anonymous type. Using this knowledge there are different techniques that can be used for introspection into anonymous type instances that have been cast to object or deferred using the dynamic keyword. There are also nifty ways to work with anonymous types by using generic methods just as Linq does with methods in the static Enumerable and Queryable classes. This way you can do things like create a new instance of any given anonymous type and without using reflection. The trick is though that you have to use an instance of the anonymous type to pass to methods in order to have the type be inferred by the generic method. If anybody is interested in these topics further as they apply to the original posters question, leave a comment and I can try to clarify some of these techniques.
Sorry for the poor explaination of the problem
Totally rewriting question
I have the following method:
public TReturn FindCached<TSearch, TReturn>(Func<TSearch, TReturn> searchMethod)
where TSearch : ISearchSpecification
where TReturn : class
{
SearchSpecification spec = new GetConcreteSearchSpecification<TSearch>();
//insert magic here to get an attribute from the method on
//the spec class that searchMethod invokes on the line below
return searchMethod(spec);
}
So I have a delegate (searchMethod) and an object (spec) that I want to invoke the delegate on. I want to inspect the object (spec) to find a custom attribute on the method that searchMethod will call when invoked.
Hope this is clearer.
Thanks
Assuming you meant searchMethod to be a variable of type Func<TSearch, TReturn> and mySearchSpec as some implementation of ISearchSpecification<TSearch>, then you are basically asking how to get attributes on a class.
For this, use something like:
object[] attrs = typeof(mySearchSpec).GetCustomAttributes(false);
Assuming that the mySearchSpec type is public, otherwise you may need a different overload for GetCustomAttributes
Addendum:
Based on your revised question, to get the attributes on a method on the actual type of spec used:
Type t = spec.GetType();
MethodInfo m = t.GetMethod("nameOfMethodToBeCalledHere");
object[] attrs = m.GetCustomAttributes(false);
Again, note that you may need overloads for GetMethod or GetCustomAttributes depending on the implementation of the actual class.
Note:
It does seem however like you might be asking for the method called in return searchMethod(spec);, but that is searchMethod and not some method on spec at all.
If you want attributes on searchMethod (nothing to do with spec):
MethodInfo m = searchMethod.Method;
object[] attrs = m.GetCustomAttributes(false);
I think that now covers all permutations of meaning...
This is quite a confusing question, let's see if I have it right:
You have a lambda function (which you describe as a delegate) called searchMethod.
You have a factory-pattern generated object called spec
So you have a method somewhere like this:
[MyCustomAttribute]
public RetClass MyMethod( SearchSpecification input ) {
return input.GetRetClass();
}
And you call this method with:
var result = FindCached( MyMethod );
And in FindCached you want to find MyCustomAttribute - in that case #jerryjvl's answer is right.
Your problem is that you could also do:
var result = FindCached( x => x.GetRetClass() );
I'm not sure from your description whether it's an attribute on the x.GetRetClass() that you actually want. In this case you need to take the lambda apart using expressions, but I wouldn't recommend it - a more complex lambda declaration will result in an anonymous delegate, which is a black-box when you try to parse it at run time.
Instead, as you're using reflection anyway, it might be easier to pass the name of the method that you want instead of the delegate reference:
var result = FindCached( "GetRetClass" );
I ran into a similar situation, jerryjvl's answer explained exactly what I wanted.
I wanted to create a generic profiling method, where I could time how long some method took to run, and retrieve the name of the method using reflection for logging purposes.
The MethodInfo was the key.
Where I have a method like:
public static bool TimeMethod(Func<bool> someMethod)
And then later I want to dynamically get it's name or some attributes off it.
MethodInfo m = someMethod.Method;
object[] attrs = m.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(MonitoringDescriptionAttribute), true);
string name = m.Name;
Cheers