I'm working on learning generics/using dependency injection/interfaces in order to have loosely coupled classes - however, I'm struggling.
For the below trivial card/deck example, how could I best adapt these classes (using the aforementioned techniques) so that I can pass any type of "Card/ICard" List in, for Deck to be able to populate/print said type. So for example, in Main, I want to be able to pass in List or List, and for deck to be able to handle this either way.
Deck.cs
public class Deck
{
List<Card> cards;
public Deck(List<Card> cards)
{
this.cards = cards;
foreach (Card.Suit suit in Enum.GetValues(typeof(Card.Suit))) {
foreach (Card.Val value in Enum.GetValues(typeof(Card.Val))) {
cards.Add(new Card(suit, value));
}
}
}
public void printDeck()
{
foreach(Card x in cards)
{
Console.WriteLine(x.ToString());
}
}
}
}
Card.cs
public class Card : ICard {
Suit suit;
Val value;
public Card(Suit suit, Val value)
{
this.suit = suit;
this.value = value;
}
public override string ToString()
{
string formatCard = "Suit: " + suit + " Value: " + value;
return formatCard;
}
public enum Suit
{
HEARTS = 1,
SPADES = 2,
CLUBS = 3,
DIAMONDS = 4
}
public enum Val
{
ONE = 1,
TWO = 2,
THREE = 3,
FOUR = 4,
FIVE = 5
}
}
}
SpecialCard.cs
public class SpecialCard : ICard{
Suit suit;
Val val;
public SpecialCard(Suit suit, Val val)
{
this.suit = suit;
this.val = val;
}
public override string ToString()
{
string formatCard = "Dragon: " + suit + " Value: " + val;
return formatCard;
}
public enum Suit
{
RIDGEBACK = 1,
FIREBALL = 2,
SHORTSNOUT = 3,
HORNTAIL = 4
}
public enum Val
{
UNO = 1,
DOS = 2,
TRES = 3,
QUATTRO = 4,
CINCZ = 5
}
}
}
ICard.cs
public interface ICard
{
string ToString();
}
Main
static void Main()
{
Deck deck = new Deck(new List<Card>());
deck.printDeck();
Console.ReadKey();
}
Thanks for any pointers!
FYP
I wouldn't have the suit and value as enums as that makes it hard to substitute different implementations. In general I'd separate classes which hold state such as a card or a deck from classes which provide logic, such as a deck builder.
I don't think you need ToString() in ICard as all classes inherit System.Object, which implements ToString(). Anyway, I don't think the card should know its own long description. Why not let the client decide based on the information (suit, value) it has available.
Given that the implementation of both types of cards is the same I'd just have a single class with very little logic. Suit and value can just be a string for now as all you do is print the values. You may wish to change Value to be a class with an int value and string description if you need to compare strength of cards later.
public class Card
{
public string Suit { get; set; }
public string Value { get; set; }
}
your deck would then be a list of cards and the type of suit used and would delegate the building of itself elsewhere to avoid violating separation of concerns.
public class Deck
{
public IEnumerable<Card> Cards { get; set; }
public string SuitName { get; set; }
}
then the bulk of your logic would exist in the deck builder. To enable the client to know which deck to build I would create an enum.
public enum DeckType
{
Standard,
Special
}
and the builder would be (static as it holds no state)
public static class DeckBuilder
{
public Deck Build(DeckType deckType)
{
var deck = new Deck();
switch (deckType)
{
case DeckType.Standard:
deck.SuitName = "Suit";
deck.Cards = CreateStandardCards();
break;
case DeckType.Special:
deck.SuitName = "Dragon";
deck.Cards = CreateSpecialCards();
break;
default:
throw new ArgumentException("deckType");
}
}
private IEnumerable<Card> CreateStandardCards()
{
var suits = new List<string> { "Hearts", "Clubs", "Diamonds", "Spades" };
var values = new List<string> { "One", "Two", "Three", "Four", "Five" };
return CreateCards(suits, values);
}
private IEnumerable<Card> CreateSpecialCards()
{
var suits = new List<string> { "Ridgeback", "Fireball", "Shortsnout", "Horntail" };
var values = new List<string> { "Uno", "Dos", "Tres", "Quattro", "Cincz" };
return CreateCards(suits, values);
}
private IEnumerable<Card> CreateCards(IEnumerable<string> suits, IEnumerable<string> values)
{
foreach (var suit in suits)
foreach (var value in values)
yield return new Card { Suit = suit, Value = value };
}
}
an alternative to this approach would be to create an IDeckBuilder with different implementations for StandardDeckBuilder and SpecialDeckBuilder, meaning the enum isn't needed. I would do this if the switch statements became larger (i.e. if you added more properties which were dependant on the deck type).
The client needs to call the appropriate builder. I would also move the printDeck logic here. The deck class shouldn't know how to print. It shouldn't know that the output goes to console.
static void Main()
{
var deck = DeckBuilder.Build(DeckType.Standard);
foreach (var card in deck.Cards)
Console.WriteLine(deck.SuitName + ": " + card.Suit + " Value: " + card.Value);
Console.ReadKey();
}
I haven't tried this so it may not compile - it's an illustration of the overall design I would use.
Related
I am new to c# and I am trying to print a user defined structure. Code:
var tracksArr = new[]
{new
{ vessel = GetVesselInfo(aisRecord.VesselId),
points = new[]
{ new
{ stampUtc = aisRecord.Time.ToString("yyyy-MM-ddTHH:mm:ssZ"),
}}}}
foreach (var item in tracksArr)
{Console.WriteLine("qqq: " + item.ToString());}
which prints:
qqq: { vessel = { key = 123456,0, mmsi = 7891011, imo = 0 }, points =
<>f__AnonymousType18`6[System.String,System.Double,System.Double...
what is this mysterious <>f__AnonymousType18 and how do I get the value of points?
For each anonymous type with unique set of fields (the new { ... } statements in means creation of instance of anonymous type) compiler will generate a class, which name will look like <>f__AnonymousType18. This class has overridden ToString method, but arrays/collections - don't and point is an array, so by default ToString returns type name which is YourAnonymousTypeName[] for arrays. You can use string.Join to output your collection:
Console.WriteLine($"qqq: {{vessel = {item.vessel}, points = {string.Join(", ", item.points.Select(p => p.ToString()))}}}");
Or create/use another collection type for points which will have overridden ToString method which returns string with all elements:
public static class ext
{
public static MyList<T> ToMyList<T>(this T[] arr)
{
return new MyList<T>(arr);
}
}
public class MyList<T> : List<T>
{
public MyList(T[] arr)
{
AddRange(arr);
}
public override string ToString()
{
return string.Join(",", this);
}
}
var tracksArr = new[]
{new
{ vessel = 1,
points = new[]
{ new
{ stampUtc = DateTime.Now.ToString("yyyy-MM-ddTHH:mm:ssZ"), }
}
.ToMyList()
}
}; // prints "qqq: { vessel = 1, points = { stampUtc = 2020-06-24T14:58:08Z } }"
Having a model something like this (I cannot change this):
public class SomeObject
{
public int Amount { get; set; }
public int TotalAmount { get; set; }
}
I need to iterate an array of SomeObject to populate some values and accumulate (perform not simple calculations) another fields.
static void Main(string[] args)
{
List<SomeObject> myCollection = new List<SomeObject>()
{
new SomeObject() { Amount = 3 },
new SomeObject() { Amount = 6 },
new SomeObject() { Amount = 9 }
};
int totalAccumulated = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < myCollection.Count; i++)
{
PopulateAndCalculate(myCollection[i], ref totalAccumulated);
}
//I don't want to create here a second for to iterate again all myCollection to set his TotalAmount property.
//There is another way?
Console.WriteLine($"The total accumulated is: {totalAccumulated}");
}
private static void PopulateAndCalculate(SomeObject prmObject, ref int accumulatedTotal)
{
//Populate a lot of another fields
accumulatedTotal += prmObject.Amount;
prmObject.TotalAmount = accumulatedTotal; //This don't work, but I need something alike
}
I don't want a second for statement to update TotalAmount property of each item in myCollection.
The main requirement is iterate the whole array, few times, don't care about string interpolation this is a short demo, this code must run in .net 2.0.
Theres is a clean/better way?
The solution is actually simple, though it's not exactly a good coding practice.
What you really need is for TotalAmount to be a static property. Without that, there's this:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
List<SomeObject> myCollection = new List<SomeObject>()
{
new SomeObject() { Amount = 3 },
new SomeObject() { Amount = 6 },
new SomeObject() { Amount = 9 }
};
int totalAccumulated = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < myCollection.Count; i++)
{
PopulateAndCalculate(myCollection[i], ref totalAccumulated);
}
/*****This is the new part*******/
myCollection[0].TotalAmount = totalAccumulated;
myCollection[1].TotalAmount = totalAccumulated;
myCollection[2].TotalAmount = totalAccumulated;
Console.WriteLine($"The total accumulated is: {totalAccumulated}");
}
private static void PopulateAndCalculate(SomeObject prmObject, ref int accumulatedTotal)
{
//Populate a lot of another fields
accumulatedTotal += prmObject.Amount;
//no need to mess with the total here as far as the properties are concerned.
}
You can st fields inside linq expression.
Could you consider this please
myCollection.ForEach(c => c.TotalAmount = myCollection.Sum(a => a.Amount));
Console.WriteLine($"Total accumulated :{myCollection.First().TotalAmount}");
I found a solution using the Observer Pattern.
Firstly I created a global delegate to be used by an event:
public delegate void UpdateTotalAmountDelegate(int totalAmount);
Then a new class called: 'CalculatorSetter'
public class CalculatorSetter
{
public event UpdateTotalAmountDelegate UpdateTotalAmounthHandler;
public void UpdateTotalAmount(int prmTotalAmount)
{
UpdateTotalAmounthHandler(prmTotalAmount);
}
}
I refactor the data object 'SomeObject' adding a field of type CalculatorSetter.
public class SomeObject
{
private CalculatorSetter finalCalculator;
public void SetCalculator(CalculatorSetter prmCalculator)
{
this.finalCalculator = prmCalculator;
finalCalculator.UpdateTotalAmounthHandler += FinalCalculator_UpdateTotalAmounthHandler;
}
private void FinalCalculator_UpdateTotalAmounthHandler(int totalAmount)
{
this.TotalAmount = totalAmount;
}
//Some Other Fields
public int Amount { get; set; }
public int TotalAmount { get; set; }
}
And my original code and unique for:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
List<SomeObject> myCollection = new List<SomeObject>()
{
new SomeObject() { Amount = 3 },
new SomeObject() { Amount = 6 },
new SomeObject() { Amount = 9 }
};
CalculatorSetter commonCalculator = new CalculatorSetter();
int totalToAccumulate = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < myCollection.Count; i++)
{
PopulateAndCalculate(myCollection[i], commonCalculator, ref totalToAccumulate);
}
commonCalculator.UpdateTotalAmount(totalToAccumulate);
Console.WriteLine($"The total accumulated is: {totalToAccumulate}");
Console.WriteLine($"The first total accumulated is: {myCollection[0].TotalAmount}");
}
Many thanks.
Use a wrapper and keep it simple (if you want you can change a little for use static methods you can, or static class but I dont see the point)
the result is:
The Amount is 3, The total ammount is 18
The Amount is 6, The total ammount is 18
The Amount is 9, The total ammount is 18
namespace Prueba1
{
class Program
{
public class WrapperInt {
public int Value { get; set; }
}
public class SomeObject
{
public int Amount { get; set; }
public WrapperInt TotalAmount { get; set; }
}
public Program() {
WrapperInt TotalAmountAllArrays = new WrapperInt();
List<SomeObject> myCollection = new List<SomeObject>()
{
new SomeObject() { Amount = 3, TotalAmount =TotalAmountAllArrays },
new SomeObject() { Amount = 6 , TotalAmount =TotalAmountAllArrays },
new SomeObject() { Amount = 9 , TotalAmount =TotalAmountAllArrays }
};
for (int i = 0; i < myCollection.Count; i++)
{
myCollection[i].TotalAmount.Value += myCollection[i].Amount;
}
foreach (var c in myCollection)
{
Console.WriteLine($"The Amount is:" + c.Amount + " The total ammount is:" + c.TotalAmount.Value);
}
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
new Program();
}
}
}
Hopefully this will work for you… One possible solution is to create a wrapper class called MyTotalList which contains a List named amounts and an int named total. MyTotalList class does not expose its list amounts as an editable list. If the class exposes this list as editable, then other methods could ultimately change an items value in that list and the MyTotalList class would not be aware of this and unfortunately contain an incorrect total. To avoid this situation and for the class to work as expected, methods must use the MyTotalList’s Add and Remove methods. To ensure this happens, the private List amounts in the MyTotalList class returns a read only list which ensures that changes to the list will not be made outside the MyTotalList class. Leaving the list exposed and editable will/could cause the class to contain an incorrect total.
My solution is to create a Class that wraps a List. MyTotalList class has a no argument constructor. Once a new instance of a MyTotalList object is created you can then use that instance to Add MyObject items to its list. Every time an item is added to the MyTotalList, list amounts the variable total gets updated with the added item’s amount. Example:
Create a new MyTotalList object:
MyTotalList listOfObjects = new MyTotalList();
Then add some MyObject instances to the listOfObjects
listOfObjects.Add(new MyObject(1,3));
listOfObjects.Add(new MyObject(2,6));
listOfObjects.Add(new MyObject(3,9));
After you add the items, you can then use the listOfObjects Total property to get the total sum of all MyObject items in the list with:
listOfObjects.Total
If you need to pass or use the List of MyTotalList items you can use:
listOfObjects.Items
Bear in mind as I discussed above, this List Items is a read-only list. Therefore you cannot add/remove items in this list as you would an editable list. So the code below will fail during implementation as these methods are not exposed for read only objects.
listOfObjects.Items.Remove(new MyObject(4, 10));
listOfObjects.Items.Add(new MyObject(4, 10));
The above lines will cause the compiler to complain: xxx… does not contain a definition for Add/Remove. This ensures methods will use the MyTotalList.Add and MyTotalsList.Remove methods and eliminate any possibility of the list changing outside the MyTotalList class.
MyObject Class
class MyObject : IComparable {
public int id { get; }
public int amount { get; }
public MyObject(int inID, int inAmount) {
id = inID;
amount = inAmount;
}
public override string ToString() {
return amount.ToString();
}
public override int GetHashCode() {
return id.GetHashCode();
}
public override bool Equals(object other) {
if (other != null)
return (this.id == ((MyObject)other).id);
return false;
}
public int CompareTo(object other) {
if (this.id > ((MyObject)other).id)
return 1;
if (this.id < ((MyObject)other).id)
return -1;
return 0;
}
}
MyTotalList Class
class MyTotalList {
private int total;
private List<MyObject> amounts;
public MyTotalList() {
total = 0;
amounts = new List<MyObject>();
}
public int ListCount {
get { return amounts.Count; }
}
public IReadOnlyCollection<MyObject> Items {
get { return amounts.AsReadOnly(); }
}
public int Total {
get { return total; }
}
public void Add(MyObject other) {
if (other != null) {
if (!(amounts.Contains(other))) {
total += other.amount;
amounts.Add(other);
}
else {
Console.WriteLine("Duplicate id's not allowed!");
}
}
}
public void Remove(MyObject other) {
if (amounts.Contains(other)) {
total -= amounts[amounts.IndexOf(other)].amount;
amounts.Remove(other);
}
else {
Console.WriteLine("Item to remove not found!");
}
}
}
Examples
MyTotalList listOfObjects = new MyTotalList();
listOfObjects.Add(new MyObject(1,3));
listOfObjects.Add(new MyObject(2,6));
listOfObjects.Add(new MyObject(3,9));
Console.WriteLine("----------------------------------------");
Console.WriteLine("Initial list with total");
Console.WriteLine("items in list:");
foreach (MyObject mo in listOfObjects.Items)
Console.Write(mo.ToString() + " ");
Console.WriteLine();
Console.WriteLine("Total from list of " + listOfObjects.ListCount +
" items is: " + listOfObjects.Total);
Console.WriteLine("----------------------------------------");
Console.WriteLine("Add three more items");
listOfObjects.Add(new MyObject(4, 10));
listOfObjects.Add(new MyObject(5, 11));
listOfObjects.Add(new MyObject(6, 12));
Console.WriteLine("items in list:");
foreach (MyObject mo in listOfObjects.Items)
Console.Write(mo.ToString() + " ");
Console.WriteLine();
Console.WriteLine("Total from list of " + listOfObjects.ListCount +
" items is: " + listOfObjects.Total);
Console.WriteLine("----------------------------------------");
Console.WriteLine("Remove id 4 (10) from the list");
listOfObjects.Remove(new MyObject(4, 10));
Console.WriteLine("items in list:");
foreach (MyObject mo in listOfObjects.Items)
Console.Write(mo.ToString() + " ");
Console.WriteLine();
Console.WriteLine("Total from list of " + listOfObjects.ListCount +
" items is: " + listOfObjects.Total);
A Side note to your original post…About the class you can not change
SomeObject {
public int Amount { get; set; }
public int TotalAmount { get; set; }
}
Regardless of how you get the total for theint varable: TotaAmount… for each instance of SomeObject class to contain the same variable with the same amount and you want to ensure this is true for all existing SomeObject instances… is well a poor design. This creates redundant data and simply waste space and it makes no sense for each variable to contain this value as it has absolutely nothing to do with that SomeObject instance. This class design is counter intuitive of a good design. As #Tim Schmelter’s comment points out "a single object should not know anything about the total amount of other objects." This “redundant data” situation is something a programmer should try to avoid, not promote.
I have an enum with 30 items in it. Each item has a corresponding function with the same name. I would like to be able to call the function by referencing the enum at a certain position.
So if the value at enum[0] = Foo, I would like to be able to call Foo(string bar) by using something like enum(0)("foobar")
In the end the point is I am running each function as a task like so:
enum Test { AA, BB, CC, DD ....}
tasks[0] = Task.Run(() => { prices[0] = AA("a string"); });
tasks[1] = Task.Run(() => { prices[1] = BB("a string"); });
tasks[2] = Task.Run(() => { prices[2] = CC("a string"); });
//for 30 tasks
What I would like to do is something along the lines of:
enum Test { AA, BB, CC, DD ....}
for (int i = 0; i < 30; i++)
{
tasks[i] = Task.Run(() => { prices[i] = (Test)i("a string"); });
}
Task.WaitAll(tasks.ToArray());
Is this something that is even possible?
EDIT:
The enum relates to controls on a form so i have an array of textboxs, label and a array of prices that is populated with the results of the functions:
enum Dealers { Dealer1, Dealer2 ... Dealer29, Dealer30 };
static int noOfDealers = Enum.GetNames(typeof(Dealers)).Length;
decimal[] prices = new decimal[noOfDealers];
TextBox[] textBox = new TextBox[noOfDealers];
Label[] boxes = new Label[noOfDealers];
for (int i = 0; i < noOfDealers; i++)
{
textBox[i] = Controls.Find("txt" + (Dealers)i, true)[0] as TextBox;
boxes[i] = Controls.Find("box" + (Dealers)i, true)[0] as Label;
prices[i] = 0;
}
//RUN 30 TASKS TO POPULATE THE PRICES ARRAY
for (int i = 0; i < noOfDealers; i++)
{
textBox[i].Text = "£" + prices[i].ToString();
}
//LOOP THROUGH PRICES ARRAY AND FIND CHEAPEST PRICE, THEN COLOUR THE LABEL BACKGROUND GREEN FOR THE TEXT BOX WITH THE NAME AT ENUM VALUE WHATEVER I IS
I guess i am just trying to make my code as concise as possible, there is the potential for the amount of tasks to double and didn't want to end up with 60 lines to populate the tasks array
I would create dictionary and map enum to actions:
Dictionary<Test, Func<string,double>> actions = new Dictionary<Test, Func<string,double>>()
{
{Test.AA, (x) => { return 5;}},
{Test.BB, (x) => { return 15; }},
}; //x is your string
var res = actions[Test.AA]("hello");
I would strongly suggest using a built in construct - like an extension method and a simple switch:
public static int GetPriceWithString(this Test test, string str)
{
switch (test)
{
case Test.AA:
break;
case Test.BB:
break;
case Test.CC:
break;
case Test.DD:
break;
default:
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(nameof(test), test, null);
}
}
then your loop looks almost the same:
for (int i = 0; i < 30; i++)
{
tasks[i] = Task.Run(() =>
{
prices[i] = ((Test)i).GetPriceWithString("a string");
});
}
What you want to do is possible with reflection, which can be a powerful tool - but ideally should only be used as a last resort, as it will hide what could be compile time errors, and cause less code readability.
Using a simple switch like this makes your code self-documented, so when you come back to this in a month you can quickly remember what the intention was.
How about using an array of delegates:
using System;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace ConsoleApplication
{
class Program
{
private static int AA(string a) { return 0; }
private static int BB(string a) { return 1; }
private static int CC(string a) { return 2; }
private static Func<string, int>[] functions = new Func<string, int>[] { AA, BB, CC };
private static int[] prices = new int[functions.Length];
private static Task[] tasks = new Task[functions.Length];
static void Main(string[] args)
{
for (int i = 0; i < functions.Length; ++i)
tasks[i] = Task.Run(() => { prices[i] = functions[i]("a string"); });
Task.WaitAll(tasks);
}
}
}
An eg. speaks a lot more than words.
I used it in a winform so the this refers to win form.
I have assumed all your methods are public , have same signature & return the same type.
enum MyName { AA,BB,CC};
//Call this in one of your methods
string [] strVal= Enum.GetNames(typeof(MyName));
int x = CallFunction(strVal[0], "A");
int y = CallFunction(strVal[1], "h");
int z = CallFunction(strVal[1], "C");
//End Call this in one of your methods
int CallFunction(string strName,string strValue)
{
return Convert.ToInt32(this.GetType().InvokeMember(strName, BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.InvokeMethod|BindingFlags.Instance, null, this, new object[] { strValue }));
}
public int AA(string s)
{
return 1;
}
public int BB(string s)
{
return 2;
}
public int CC(string s)
{
return 3;
}
Another solution. I hope somebody will consider it as overkill :)
Create abstract class DealerBase.
public abstract class DealerBase
{
public string Name { get; }
public decimal Price { get; set; }
protected DealerBase(string name)
{
Name = name;
}
public abstract void UpdatePrice();
}
Then create classes for every dealers you have and implement own logic for UpdatePrice method.
public class Dealer1 : DealerBase
{
public Dealer1() : base("DealerOne") { }
public override void UpdatePrice()
{
//Calculate price
Price = DealerOneCalculationMethod();
}
}
public class Dealer2 : DealerBase
{
public Dealer2() : base("DealerTwo") { }
public override void UpdatePrice()
{
//Calculate price
Price = DealerTwoCalculationMethod();
}
}
And so on..
Then you just create collection of dealers which can be easily iterated
var dealers = new List<DealerBase>
{
new Dealer1(),
new Dealer2()
}
foreach(var dealer in dealers)
{
dealer.UpdatePrice();
}
You can loop dealers and generate textboxes, labels in the winforms.
But I suggest to use DataGridView where code will be tiny clearer.
First implement INotifyPropertyChanged interface in the base class DealerBase
public abstract class DealerBase : INotifyPropertyChanged
{
public string Name { get; }
protected decimal _Price;
public decimal Price
{
get { return _Price; }
set
{
if (Equals(_Price, value)) return;
_Price = value;
// next method will inform DataGridView about changes
// and update value there too
RaisePropertyChanged();
}
protected DealerBase(string name)
{
Name = name;
}
public abstract void UpdatePrice();
// Implementation of INotifyPropertyChanged
public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged;
protected void RaisePropertyChanged([CallerMemberName] string propertyName = null)
{
var handler = PropertyChanged;
if (handler != null) handler(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propertyName));
}
}
The in the Form you can create BindingList<DealerViewModelBase> and set it to DataGridView.DataSource
public class YourForm: Form
{
public YourForm()
{
InitializeComponent();
var dealers = new List<DealerBase>
{
new Dealer1(),
new Dealer2()
};
var bindSource = new BindingList<DealerBase>(dealers);
dataGridView.DataSource = bindSource;
}
// Add button which update prices for all dealers
private void ButtonUpdatePrices_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var dealers = (BindingList<DealerBase>)dataGridView.DataSource;
foreach (var dealer in dealers)
{
dealer.UpdatePrice();
// Because we call `RaisePropertyChanged` in
// setter of Price - prices will be automatically
// updated in DataGridView
}
}
}
Idea of this approach you put different logic of different dealers in the separated class which. Because all dealer classes will inherit from same abstract class you can add different dealers to the collection.
You already have hardcoded enums and correspondent method which you try to link together. This approach make using of dealers collection little bid easy
I would like an advice. My project have a lot of equals methods with different values, and i would like to do a single method that does the same.
The methods are this:
private void Enum1()
{
Console.WriteLine(Enum.GetValue(ENUM1.Code));
Console.WriteLine(Enum.GetValue(ENUM1.Info));
}
private void Enum2()
{
Console.WriteLine(Enum.GetValue(ENUM2.Code));
Console.WriteLine(Enum.GetValue(ENUM2.Info));
}
private void Enum3()
{
Console.WriteLine(Enum.GetValue(ENUM3.Code));
Console.WriteLine(Enum.GetValue(ENUM3.Info));
}
This is the enums:
public enum ENUM1
{
Code = 1,
Info = 3
}
public enum ENUM2
{
Code = 91,
Info = 4
}
public enum ENUM3
{
Code = 6,
Info = 27
}
There is only a way to create a method by inserting the input type of enum to use? maybe a similar solution of this:
private void General("ENUM1")
{
var type = ENUM1;
switch (p)
{
case "ENUM1":
type = ENUM1;
case "ENUM2":
type = ENUM2;
case "CASALINGHI":
type = ENUM3;
default:
type = ENUM1;
}
Console.WriteLine(Enum.GetValue(type.Code));
Console.WriteLine(Enum.GetValue(type.Info));
}
I think something like this is what you are looking for:
private void General<T>()
{
var values = Enum.GetValues(typeof(T));
foreach(var value in values)
Console.WriteLine(value);
}
General<Enum1>();
General<Enum2>();
General<Enum3>();
Or this, depending on how you want to use it:
private void General(Type enumType)
{
var values = Enum.GetValues(enumType);
foreach(var value in values)
Console.WriteLine(value);
}
General(typeof(Enum1));
General(typeof(Enum2));
General(typeof(Enum3));
Why do you keep using enums, when you can easily use classes? Read more about Object-Oriented programming.
Create a single class:
public class MyEnum
{
public int Code
{
get; set;
}
public int Info
{
get; set;
}
public string Display()
{
Console.WriteLine(this.Code);
Console.WriteLine(this.Info)
}
//
// This will keep your enums static, available from any method
//
private static List<MyEnum> _globals = new List<MyEnum();
public static List<MyEnum> Globals ()
{
if (this._globals.Count == 0)
{
this._globals.Add(new MyEnum(){ Code = 1, Info = 3 });
this._globals.Add(new MyEnum(){ Code = 91, Info = 4 });
this._globals.Add(new MyEnum(){ Code = 6, Info = 27 });
}
return this._globals;
}
}
After this you can easily print out all the enums with the following code:
foreach (MyEnum* en in MyEnum.Globals())
{
en.Display();
}
Please look into solutions similar to this one, since your enum's obviously represent some data.
To give some background I'm trying to solve the Project Euler Problem 54 involving poker hands. Though there's infinite approaches to this. What I would like to do is enumerate through a list of strings, for example:
{ "8C", "TS", "KC", "9H", "4S" };
I would like to "get" an instance of class card with properties value, and suit, for each respective string. I've not yet utilized get/set so maybe there is an obvious approach to this I'm missing.
Ultimately I would like to have a list of objects type Card, I don't mind building all the card's ahead of time, such that "2H" returns an instance of type Card where suit = Hearts, and value = 2, for example.
I know this code is wrong, but it should give an idea of what I'm trying to do. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
class Card
{
public string suit;
public int value;
public string cardname
{
get
{
if (cardname == "2H") Card TwoH = new Card();
TwoH.suit = "Hearts"
TwoH.value = 2;
return TwoH;
}
}
}
Why not make a constructor that fills suit and value based on a string parameter
public Card(string name)
{
switch(name)
{
case "2H":
this.suit = "Hearts";
this.value = 2;
break;
//...
}
}
This might not be the exact solution you seem to be asking for but if the values you'll be getting (eg 2H, 3C etc) are all 2 characters long, then you can try this:
public class Card
{
public string suit { get; set; }
public int value { get; set; }
public static Card GetCard(string cardName)
{
string tmpSuit;
int tmpValue;
char[] cardNameParts = cardName.ToCharArray();
switch(charNameParts[0])
{
case "A":
tmpValue = 1;
break;
case "2":
tmpValue = 2;
break;
...
}
switch(charNameParts[1])
{
case "H":
tmpSuit= "Hearts";
break;
case "C":
tmpSuit= "Clubs";
break;
...
}
return new Card() { suit = tmpSuit, value = tmpValue };
}
}
I would do it like that:
public class Card
{
public string Suit { get; set; }
public int Value { get; set; }
public static Card FromString(string s)
{
if (s == "2H") return new Card() { Suit = "Hearts", Value = 2 };
else if (s == "....")
...
else return null;
}
}
I have converted your suit and value field into properties and instead of some getter method which in your case wouldn't work I have added a static method.
You can use it like this Card card2H = Card.FromString("2H");
Maybe use two switch statements, first
switch (cardname[0])
{
...
}
then
switch (cardname[1])
{
...
}
Before that, check that cardname.Length == 2. In each switch, have a default section where you throw an exception in case the char value doesn't make sense.