C# Pass method with arguments as a parameter to Lazy<T> - c#

Let's consider this code:
public void DoSomething<T>(Func<T> MyFunc)
{
var NewLazyItem = new Lazy<T>(MyFunc);
// do stuff
// use the NewLazyItem
}
And let's say I have a method like this:
public int Add(int a, int b) { return a + b; }
What I would like to achieve is to be able to pass the Add method to the DoSomething method but with parameters along.
Ideally I could pass Add, 2 and 3 and when the NewLazy item gets used, Add(2, 3) gets called.
I tried various ideas, but I can't find a way to make it work.

Unless I'm misunderstanding the question, the simplest way is just to include the parameters as closures for a lambda expression:
var x = 2;
var y = 3;
DoSomething(() => Add(x, y));

Related

Call random method directly instead of using a lot of if-statements, C#

Relative newcomer to c# here.
Let’s say I have 50 different methods a1(), a2(), … a50() and I want to call a random one. One way to do it is of course to generate a random int, nr, between 1 and 50 and then use a lot of if statements like if(nr == 1){
a1()
} and so on. Quite cumbersome - can I do something smarter?
Is it for example possible to do something along the lines of creating a string which is initially only “a” and then adding nr as a string and then calling that string as method? Like this:
Public void RandomMethod()
{
nr = Random.Range(1,51);
string = ‘a’ + nr.tostring();
string();
}
I know this doesn’t work, but something like this instead of my first idea would save me hundreds of lines of code
Any response is appreciated 😊
One option would be to put your functions into a collection, say a List for example. Then you could randomly index into that collection to get a random function to call. You would generate a random index between 0 and the length of the List minus 1. This could apply generally to any number of functions then (50 or otherwise).
To do exactly what you asked (and, I have no clue why you'd want to), consider something like this:
Create a delegate that matches the call signature of all of your methods (they all have to have the same call signature or ... I really can't imagine what you'd want to do if they didn't). You could use an Action or Func declaration, but I'm going to make it clear here:
public delegate void SomeMethod(int i);
Then write your 50 methods. All their call signatures will match the delegate:
public static void Method1(int i) { System.Console.WriteLine($"{nameof(Method1)}: {i}"); }
public static void Method2(int i) { System.Console.WriteLine($"{nameof(Method2)}: {i}"); }
public static void Method3(int i) { System.Console.WriteLine($"{nameof(Method3)}: {i}"); }
public static void Method4(int i) { System.Console.WriteLine($"{nameof(Method4)}: {i}"); }
// ...
public static void Method50(int i) { System.Console.WriteLine($"{nameof(Method50)}: {i}"); }
Then create an array of delegates:
public static SomeMethod[] Methods = new SomeMethod[]
{
Method1,
Method2,
Method3,
Method4,
//...
Method50,
};
And then a method that picks 1 or more from the list at random and runs them:
public void Run5RandomMethods()
{
Random random = new Random();
for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
var randNumber = random.Next(50);
var method = Methods[randNumber];
method.Invoke(i);
}
}
Note: this is untested, I'm not going to create 50 dummy methods for you. If you find an issue, comment below and I'll fix the code
By the way, what you show in your question (composing the name of the method by concatenating a string and the string representation of a number) is doable using a technology known as Reflection. Let me know if you really want to do that.
So, assuming we have fifty methods that all have a signature like
void SomeMethod()
{
...
}
You could declare an array like below, this is an array of Action delegates
var methods = new Action[]
{
SomeMethod,
SomeOtherMethod,
() => _ = SomeFunctionWithAHardcodedParameter("Wibble"),
...
}
Then you could call a random method by doing,
method[Random.Next(methods.Length)]();
First off, I just want to say something similar to what others have already said: you should readdress whether you need 50 methods named a1(), a2(), ..., a50(), and rethink what the problem you're trying to solve is (which you haven't provided enough information for us to help you with).
If that was hyperbole, try to avoid doing that; it may muddy the responses to solve a perceived problem ("why do you have 50 poorly-named methods?") instead of your actual problem ("can I execute a randomly selected method?" <- still a weird question, but who am I to judge...).
That out of the way, you can use something like Reflection. This can be "dangerous" and expensive when executing, so use with caution... or better yet don't use it, but be aware of it, because it can lead you to think Reflection is the answer to problems you don't actually have.
Anyway, you can:
// have an instance of an object
var obj = new ClassName();
// get all the methods of the object
var methodInfos = typeof(ClassName).GetMethods();
// filter them somehow
var filteredMethodInfos = methodInfos.Where(m => Regex.IsMatch(m.Name, #"\a[\d]{1,2}")).ToArray();
// get a random one and invoke it
var rnd = new Random();
filteredMethodInfos[rnd.Next(filteredMethodInfos.Length)].Invoke(obj, null);
I haven't tested this, but it should in theory work.
But again: don't use reflection if you don't have to. There's probably an issue with your root question (as Tim Schmelter said, this is an "XY-problem") if your answer is "randomly execute 1 of 50 methods".

Call a method with an unknown signature

I'm using C# 4.6.2, though could upgrade to 4.7.2 if it's possible there.
In many places in our code we have a loop with wait statements to check for a specific value when a function is called, wait and retry if it's not what we wanted until a maximum number of retries.
I'd like to abstract this out, but the only implementation I can think of requires you pass in a method with a variable number of arguments of variable types, which after much searching of Google appeared to not be possible about 5 years ago. There has been many improvements to C# since then, so
is it still not possible?
If it is now possible how do I do it?
If it isn't possible can you think of any other way I can achieve my goal?
The sort of thing I'm looking for is:
public bool GenericLoopWait(int maxWaitSeconds, int waitMsPerIteration,??? DoSomething,object expectedResult,...)
int maxRetries = maxWaitSeconds*1000/waitMsPerIteration;
SomeType result=null;
for(int i=0; i<maxRetries; i++){
result = DoSomething(...);
if(result==expectedResult) break;
Thread.Sleep(waitMsPerIteration);
}
return result==expectedResult
}
And then both of these would work:
GenericLoopWait(5,500,Browser.Webdriver.FindElements(selector).Any(),true);
GenericLoopWait(5,500,Api.GetSpecificObject(api,objectName),"expectedOutcome");
You could use generics and Func and wrap the actual calls parameters when you call through to the method.
public bool GenericLoopWait<T>(int maxWaitSeconds, int waitMsPerIteration, Func<T> DoSomething, T expectedResult = default(T))
{
int maxRetries = maxWaitSeconds * 1000 / waitMsPerIteration;
T result = default(T);
for (int i = 0; i < maxRetries; i++)
{
result = DoSomething();
if (expectedResult.Equals(result)) break;
Thread.Sleep(waitMsPerIteration);
}
return expectedResult.Equals(result);
}
Calling code:
GenericLoopWait(5, 500, () => Browser.Webdriver.FindElements(selector).Any(), true);
GenericLoopWait(5, 500, () => Api.GetSpecificObject(api,objectName), "expectedOutcome")
Working dotnetfiddle
The general pattern is to create a "Wrapper" method that accepts an Action or a Func as a parameter. Your wrapper can do it's own logic, and Invoke the parameter at the correct time.
As a simple generic example:
public void MethodWrapper(Action action)
{
Console.WriteLine("begin");
action.Invoke();
Console.WriteLine("end");
}
You could then do this:
void Main()
{
var a = 1;
var b = 2;
MethodWrapper(() => DoSomething(a));
MethodWrapper(() => DoSomethingElse(a,b));
}
public void DoSomething(int a)
{
Debug.WriteLine($"a={a}");
}
public void DoSomethingElse(int a, int b)
{
Debug.WriteLine($"a={a}, b={b}");
}
To generate this output:
begin
a=1
end
begin
a=1, b=2
end
For your specific case, your wrapper could take additional parameters specifying things like number of retries, time between calls, or acceptance criteria.

Delegate instances vs passing function directly

I am curious as to what is the point of creating instances of delegates. I understand that they are function pointers but what is the purpose of the using delegate instances?
public delegate bool IsEven(int x);
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
int[] nums = new int[] { 1, 3, 4, 5, 6,7, 8, 9 };
// creating an instance of delegate and making it point to 'CheckEven' function
IsEven isEven = new IsEven(CheckEven);
// using delegate for parameter to get sum of evens
int tot1 = Sums(nums, isEven);
// passing in the function directly as parameter and not delegate instance
int tot2 = Sums(nums, CheckEven);
// using lambda expressions
int tot3 = Sums(nums, x=> x%2==0);
ReadKey();
}
public static int Sums(int[] nums, IsEven isEvenOdd)
{
int sum = 0;
foreach(int x in nums)
{
if (isEvenOdd(x))
sum += x;
}
return sum;
}
public static bool CheckEven(int x)
{
if (x % 2 == 0)
return true;
else
return false;
}
}
At first thought opting to always use lambdas seems like the best idea if the functionality of the function you are going to pass does not have complex implementation, otherwise why wouldn't I just pass my function directly into the parameters? Also with Lambdas it is much easier to change it to compute the sum of odds as oppose to creating an entire new method as I would have to with delegates.
You already used delegates even if you passed the method directly, the Sums method could not receive the method name if it's not set its expectation by the delegate definition.
Consider changing the delegate name to public delegate bool EvenOddStatus(int x);
you can send either your CheckEven method or this method:
public static bool CheckOdd(int x)
{
if (x % 2 != 0) // here changed
return true;
else return false;
}
(of course you can use lambda here, but not in more complicated scenarios)
Now your Sums method can sum up either odd or even numbers based on the calling code (either pass CheckEven or CheckOdd).
Delegates are pointers to methods. you define how the code want the method to receive and return, and the calling code can pass a pre-defined implementation later, either a method or delegate.
What if your Main is another method that doesn't know what to sum, odds or evens? it will have a delegate from a calling code up the stack.

C# About the Ref<T> class i've found

Link to the class :
https://stackoverflow.com/a/4543089/6591306
My question is simple, the usage of the class is as so :
The getter is getting () => variable, and the setter is getting z => { variable = z; }
In order to call the function i call it like this :
ref<int> tempx;
int tempy = 5;
tempx=new Ref<int>(() => tempy, z => { tempy = z; });
tempy = 6;//tempx.Value becomes 6
tempx.Value = 7;//tempy becomes 7
I want to achieve that in order to call the class i'll do it :
tempx=new Ref<int>(tempy);
without writing the actions, so that it won't take alot of lines of code, and the actions will be saved in the class, and whenever i call it they'll be performed automatically.
I dont know how to achieve it, therefore i'm asking here.
You can't. There's no way to pass in an int and end up with the ability to get or set it at some arbitrary point in time in the future; you need to create lambdas in order to be able to do that.
I know this is an old question, but this extension method works for me:
public static Ref<T> GetRef<T>(this T obj)
{
return new Ref<T>(()=>obj,x=>obj=x);
}
You use it like this:
Ref<targetType> yourRefName=target.GetRef<targetType>();
or in your case:
tempx=tempy.GetRef<int>();
Edit: This only works for classes, not value types like ints, so doesn't help with this specific question

Using Moq, How do you Mock a method that uses local variables

New to Moq and this is a very simple example. I want to Mock the call to my "int smokeTest(int a, int b)" method which is used within my method "string getCode(int someID)". Variables for smokeTest are declared and set within getCode. The issue is when I mock the method call to smokeTest I always get a result of "0" within getCode but I want to see my predefined result of "20". The only work around I've found is to overload the method and pass in all variables. However, I do not want to do this because many of the methods I want to test declare and use local variables. What's the best way to test this method using Moq? Thanks
// Example A
public string getCode(int someID)
{
int x = 5;
int y = 5;
int z = _dataAccess.smokeTest(x, y);
return _dataAccess.getCode(someID);
}
// NOTE: Doesn't work as wanted
[Test]
public void test_getCode_TestB()
{
var x = It.IsAny<int>();
var y = It.IsAny<int>();
// NOTE: "20" is not returned, 0 is returned instead because local variables are used
_mockDataAccess.Setup(m => m.smokeTest(x, y)).Returns(20);
_mockDataAccess.Setup(m => m.getCode(234)).Returns("def345");
var result = _businessLogic.getCode(234);
Assert.IsTrue(result == "def345");
}
// Example B
// NOTE: Workaround - pass in variables
public string getCode(int someID, int a, int b)
{
var c = _dataAccess.smokeTest(a, b);
return _dataAccess.getCode(someID);
}
[Test]
public void test_getCode_TestC()
{
var x = It.IsAny<int>();
var y = It.IsAny<int>();
// NOTE: "20" is returned as wanted
_mockDataAccess.Setup(m => m.smokeTest(x, y)).Returns(20);
_mockDataAccess.Setup(m => m.getCode(234)).Returns("def345");
var result = _businessLogic.getCode(234, x, y);
Assert.IsTrue(result == "def345");
}
It will only work if you pass It.IsAny<int>() directly into the moq setup:
_mockDataAccess.Setup(m => m.smokeTest(It.IsAny<int>(), It.IsAny<int>())).Returns(20);
I was browsing moq source code to found out that doing this:
int x = It.IsAny<int>();
int y = It.IsAny<int>();
_mockDataAccess.Setup(m => m.smokeTest(x, y)).Returns(20);
will assigened x and y to be the deafult value of int which is 0, so your setup is equivalent to this:
_mockDataAccess.Setup(m => m.smokeTest(0, 0)).Returns(20);
this setup tells the moq to return 20 if the parameters are 0 and 0, otherwise it will return the deafult value of int which is 0 again. This is not the behavior you intended to create so you should not assigned It.IsAny<int>() into x and y before you pass them into the moq setup.
As #Rob comment indicates It.IsAny<T> is a kind of stub that you can pass into the moq setup, the setup method will know how to deal with it using Expression Trees, but the value that this method actually returns is always the deafult of T. This is why we have to use this method always directly in the moq setup.

Categories

Resources