Confused about interfaces and implementation - c#

The case is very simple, I have this interface
public interface IHasNext
{
IHasNext NextItem { get; set; }
}
and then I attempt to implement it like so:
public class Item : IHasNext
{
public int Id { get; set; }
Item NextItem { get; set; }
}
but this won't work because the property NextItem of the implementation is not of the same type (even if the type implements the interface). So could someone kindly explain me the reason for this not working, when you can quite liberally swap types for interfaces they implement even as type parameters (at least on IEnumerable and IQueryable).

Consider this code:
public class BadItem : IHasNext
{
public IHasNext { get; set; }
}
Now:
IHasNext item = new Item();
item.NextItem = new BadItem();
That's perfectly valid... but what would you expect it to do on the Item class? Its NextItem property is of type Item, so it doesn't know what to do with a BadItem...
Basically, doing this is unsafe.
You may want to make your interface generic:
public interface IHasNext<T> where T : IHasNext<T>
{
T NextItem { get; set; }
}
public class Item : IHasNext<Item>
{
public int Id { get; set; }
IHasNext<Item> NextItem { get; set; }
}

The interface states that the property must be of type IHasNext, your code should be:
public class Item : IHasNext
{
public int Id { get; set; }
IHasNext NextItem { get; set; }
}

Why aren't you implementing it as:
public class Item : IHasNext
{
public int Id { get; set; }
IHasNext NextItem { get; set; }
}
? This interface could be on any class that implements IHasNext.
But better still is to make it generic
public interface IHasNext<T>
{
T NextItem { get; set; }
}
public class Item : IHasNext<Item>
{
public int Id { get; set; }
Item NextItem { get; set; }
}

Related

C# Interface Inheritance override

I confused about a base interface property hiding, what is still needed in the implemented class, can somebody tell me why?
The goal will be the 'EndClass' only hide/override the 'IClassValue Value', and not need to implement the already hide 'IBaseClassValue Value'.
Thanks!
public interface IBaseClassValue { }
public interface IClassValue : IBaseClassValue { }
public class ClassValue : IClassValue { }
//-----------------------------------------
public interface IEndClassBase
{
IBaseClassValue Value { get; set; }
}
public interface IEndClassBaseChild : IEndClassBase
{
new IClassValue Value { get; set; }
}
//-----------------------------------------
public abstract class EndClassAbs<TValue>
{
TValue Value { get; set; }
}
public class EndClass : EndClassAbs<ClassValue>, IEndClassBaseChild
{
public new IClassValue Value { get; set; }
//IBaseClassValue IEndClassBase.Value { get; set; } //-> Why need here the base member while already hide in the 'IEndClassBaseChild' interface
}
If I use somekind of shadow class '_EndClass' then inherit from it, the 'EndClass' could hide/override the 'ClassValue'. I still don't know why this can not do in one step.
public class _EndClass : EndClassAbs<ClassValue>, IEndClassBase
{
public new IBaseClassValue Value { get; set; }
}
public class EndClass : _EndClass, IEndClassBaseChild
{
public new IClassValue Value { get; set; }
}

How do I create a generic List using abstract class?

I have a Json class "GetAllDevices()". My JSON response consists of an Array/List of objects, where each object has the below common properties.
public class GetAllDevices
{
[JsonProperty("_id")]
public string Id { get; set; }
[JsonProperty("name")]
public string Name { get; set; }
[JsonProperty("type")]
public string Type { get; set; }
[JsonProperty("actions")]
public Action[] Actions { get; set; }
public class Action
{
public string _id { get; set; }
public Action_Def action_def { get; set; }
}
public class Action_Def
{
public string _id { get; set; }
public string name { get; set; }
}
}
I want to create 2 generic lists containing all the above properties based on its "type".
lstfoo1 List contains all the properties(_id, name type and actions) where type="foo1". Similarly, lstfoo2 is a List which contains the above properties where type="foo2".
What I have done so far:
string strJson=getJSON();
Foo1 lstfoo1=new Foo1();
Foo2 lstfoo2=new Foo2();
List<Foo1> foo1list= lstfoo1.GetDeviceData(strJson);
List<Foo2> foo2list = lstfoo2.GetDeviceData(strJson);
public class AllFoo1: GetAllDevices
{
}
public class AllFoo2: GetAllDevices
{
}
public abstract class HomeDevices<T>
{
public string type { get; set; }
public string _id { get; set; }
public List<AllFoo1> lstfoo1{ get; set; }
public List<AllFoo2> lstfoo2{ get; set; }
public abstract List<T> GetDeviceData(string jsonResult);
}
public class Foo1: HomeDevices<AllFoo1>
{
public Foo1()
{
type = "foo1";
}
public override List<AllFoo1> GetDeviceData(string jsonResult)
{
var lst =Newtonsoft.Json.JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<List<AllFoo1>>(jsonResult);
var lst1 = lst.Where(x => x.Type.Equals(type)).ToList();
return lst1;
}
}
public class Foo2: HomeDevices<AllFoo2>
{
public Foo2()
{
type = "foo2";
}
public override List<AllFoo2> GetDeviceData(string jsonResult)
{
var lst = Newtonsoft.Json.JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<List<AllFoo2>>(jsonResult);
var lst1 = lst.Where(x => x.Type.Equals(type)).ToList();
return lst1;
}
}
My question is, is there an easier way to do this using abstract classes? Can I directly convert my "GetAllDevices" class into an abstract class and inherit it and deserialize into it and create a generic list?
This should help, if I understand your problem correctly. Let me know if you have questions or it doesn't work as you need. I put this together really quickly without testing.
The way the Type property is defined could be improved but I left it as you had it.
public class MyApplication
{
public void DoWork()
{
string json = getJSON();
DeviceTypeOne foo1 = new DeviceTypeOne();
DeviceTypeTwo foo2 = new DeviceTypeTwo();
IList<DeviceTypeOne> foo1Results = foo1.GetDeviceData(json); // calls GetDeviceData extension method
IList<DeviceTypeTwo> foo2Results = foo2.GetDeviceData(json); // calls GetDeviceData extension method
}
}
// implemented GetDeviceData as extension method of DeviceBase, instead of the abstract method within DeviceBase,
// it's slightly cleaner than the abstract method
public static class DeviceExtensions
{
public static IList<T> GetDeviceData<T>(this T device, string jsonResult) where T : DeviceBase
{
IEnumerable<T> deviceDataList = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<IEnumerable<T>>(jsonResult);
IEnumerable<T> resultList = deviceDataList.Where(x => x.Type.Equals(typeof(T).Name));
return resultList.ToList();
}
}
// abstract base class only used to house common properties and control Type assignment
public abstract class DeviceBase : IDeviceData
{
protected DeviceBase(string type)
{
if(string.IsNullOrEmpty(type)) { throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(type));}
Type = type; // type's value can only be set by classes that inherit and must be set at construction time
}
[JsonProperty("_id")]
public string Id { get; set; }
[JsonProperty("name")]
public string Name { get; set; }
[JsonProperty("type")]
public string Type { get; private set;}
[JsonProperty("actions")]
public DeviceAction[] Actions { get; set; }
}
public class DeviceTypeOne : DeviceBase
{
public DeviceTypeOne() : base(nameof(DeviceTypeOne))
{
}
}
public class DeviceTypeTwo : DeviceBase
{
public DeviceTypeTwo() : base(nameof(DeviceTypeTwo))
{
}
}
// implemented GetAllDevices class as IDeviceData interface
public interface IDeviceData
{
string Id { get; set; }
string Name { get; set; }
string Type { get; }
DeviceAction[] Actions { get; set; }
}
// renamed and relocated class Action to DeviceAction
public class DeviceAction
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public DeviceActionDefinition DeviceActionDefinition { get; set; }
}
// renamed and relocated Action_Def to DeviceActionDefinition
public class DeviceActionDefinition
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
It should be simple enough to move the implementation of method GetDeviceData() to the base class.
For this to work, you will need to add a constraint on T so the compiler knows a bit more about the base type. You will also need to implement a constructor to populate the concrete type's type string you use around. This is a necessary measure to ensure the value is always populated as it is used for comparison in the method in question:
public abstract class HomeDevices<T> where T: GetAllDevices
{
public HomeDevices(string concreteType)
{
type = concreteType;
}
public string type { get; set; }
public string _id { get; set; }
public List<AllFoo1> lstfoo1 { get; set; }
public List<AllFoo2> lstfoo2 { get; set; }
//This method is now generic and works for both.
public List<T> GetDeviceData(string jsonResult)
{
var lst = Newtonsoft.Json.JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<List<T>>(jsonResult);
var lst1 = lst.Where(x => x.Type.Equals(type)).ToList();
return lst1;
}
}
I hope that helps.

Interface Cannot implicitly convert type

I have following code below. I have two main interfaces IWatch and IWatchService. Oryginally Watch() was in IWatchService and there was no IWatch but since that CollectionService cannot use Watch() method i decided (ISP) to create IWatch interface additionally.In CollectionService i want in ctor pass either DatabaseWatchService or RemoteFilesWatchService therefore i put parameter type in ctor as IWatchService<IEntity> watchService nevertheless when in DoIt() method initialize fileWatcherServiceCsv variable it says:
Cannot implicitly convert type 'RemoteFilesWatchService' to
'IWatchService'. An explicit conversion exists (are you
missing a cast?)
public interface IWatch
{
void Watch();
}
public interface IWatchService<TDataEntity> where TDataEntity : IEntity
{
INotificationFactory NotificationFactory { get; }
ObservableCollection<TDataEntity> MatchingEntries { get; set; }
}
public interface IDatabaseWatchService<TDataEntity> : IWatchService<TDataEntity> where TDataEntity : IDatabaseEntity
{
IDatabaseRepository<IDbManager> DatabaseRepository { get; }
}
public interface IRemoteFilesWatchService<TDataEntity> : IWatchService<TDataEntity> where TDataEntity : IFileEntity
{
List<string> ExistingRemoteFiles { get; set; }
List<RemoteLocation> RemoteLocations { get; set; }
IWinScpOperations RemoteManager { get; set; }
IRemoteFilesRepository<IDbManager, TDataEntity> RemoteFilesRepository { get; }
}
public class RemoteFilesWatchService : IRemoteFilesWatchService<IFileEntity>, IWatch
{
public INotificationFactory NotificationFactory { get; }
public ObservableCollection<IFileEntity> MatchingEntries { get; set; }
public List<string> ExistingRemoteFiles { get; set; }
public List<RemoteLocation> RemoteLocations { get; set; }
public IWinScpOperations RemoteManager { get; set; }
public IRemoteFilesRepository<IDbManager, IFileEntity> RemoteFilesRepository { get; }
public RemoteFilesWatchService(IWinScpOperations remoteOperator,
IRemoteFilesRepository<IDbManager, IFileEntity> remoteFilesRepository,
INotificationFactory notificationFactory)
{
RemoteManager = remoteOperator;
RemoteFilesRepository = remoteFilesRepository; //csv, xml or other repo could be injected
NotificationFactory = notificationFactory;
}
public void Watch()
{
}
}
public class DatabaseWatchService : IDatabaseWatchService<DatabaseQuery>, IWatch
{
public INotificationFactory NotificationFactory { get; }
public ObservableCollection<DatabaseQuery> MatchingEntries { get; set; }
public IDatabaseRepository<IDbManager> DatabaseRepository { get; }
public DatabaseWatchService(IDatabaseRepository<IDbManager> databaseRepository,
INotificationFactory notificationFactory)
{
DatabaseRepository = databaseRepository;
NotificationFactory = notificationFactory;
}
public void Watch()
{
}
}
public class CollectionService
{
private IWatchService<IEntity> _watchService;
public CollectionService(IWatchService<IEntity> watchService)
{
_watchService = watchService;
}
}
class Run
{
void DoIt()
{
IWatchService<IEntity> fileWatcherServiceCsv = new RemoteFilesWatchService(new WinScpOperations(),
new RemoteCsvFilesRepository(new DbManager(ConnectionDbType.MySql)),
new NotificationFactory());
var coll1 = new CollectionService(fileWatcherServiceCsv);
}
}
public interface IEntity
{
}
public interface IFileEntity : IEntity
{
int Id { get; set; }
string Name { get; set; }
bool IsActive { get; set; }
bool RemoveFromSource { get; set; }
string DestinationFolder { get; set; }
RemoteLocation RemoteLocation { get; set; }
}
public interface IDatabaseEntity : IEntity
{
}
public class CsvFile : IFileEntity
{
public int ColumnHeader { get; set; }
public int ColumnsCount { get; set; }
public string Separator { get; set; }
public int ValuesRowStartposition { get; set; }
public int ColumnRowPosition { get; set; }
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public bool IsActive { get; set; }
public bool RemoveFromSource { get; set; }
public string DestinationFolder { get; set; }
public RemoteLocation RemoteLocation { get; set; }
}
public class XmlFile : IFileEntity
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public bool IsActive { get; set; }
public bool RemoveFromSource { get; set; }
public string DestinationFolder { get; set; }
public RemoteLocation RemoteLocation { get; set; }
public string SubNode { get; set; }
public string MainNode { get; set; }
}
This question gets posted almost every day. One more time!
A box of apples is not a box of fruit. Why not?
You can put a banana into a box of fruit, but you cannot put a banana into a box of apples, so a box of apples is not a box of fruit, because the operations you can perform on them are different. Similarly, a box of fruit is not a box of apples.
You're trying to use a IWatchService (box) of IFileEntity (apples) as an IWatchService of IEntity (fruit), and that's not legal.
Now, you might notice that in C# you can use an IEnumerable<Apple> where an IEnumerable<Fruit> is expected. That works just fine because there is no way to put a banana into an IEnumerable<Fruit>. In every member of IEnumerable<T> and IEnumerator<T>, the T comes out, not in.
If you are in that situation then you can mark your interface as
interface IWatchService<out T> ...
And the compiler will verify that every T in the interface is used in "out" positions, and then will allow the conversion you want.
That conversion is called a generic covariant conversion and it only works when:
The generic type is an interface or delegate
The type parameter is marked out, and the compiler verifies that is safe
The varying types (Fruit and Apple, say) are both reference types. You can't do covariant conversions involving int and object, for example.
Your RemoteFilesWatchService implements interface IWatchService<IFileEntity>, while your CollectionService expects a IWatchService<IEntity>. The two types are different, that's why it cannot convert.
Modify your CollectionService to accept IWatchService<IFileEntity> instead, or make RemoteFilesWatchService implement IRemoteFilesWatchService<IEntity>. Or use a non-generic interface in CollectionService instead.
You cannot have a IWatchService<IFileEntity> and treat it as a IWatchService<IEntity>. Compare it to a List<T> for example. You cannot expect to be able to do this:
class Animal {}
class Bird : Animal {}
class Elephant : Animal {}
var birds = new List<Bird>();
// compiler does not allow this...
List<Animal> animals = birds;
// ...because there is no point in adding elephants to a list of birds.
animals.Add(new Elephant());
Making a slight change to take support from variance, should fix your issue as follows:
public interface IEntity
{
}
public interface IFileEntity : IEntity
{
...
}
public interface IWatchService<out TDataEntity> where TDataEntity : IEntity //note the "out" keyword here.
{
}
You can learn more about Variance in Generic Interfaces Here

Trying to work out these interfaces

I'm trying to create some interfaces. The IReportSection object will have one string and a collection of items, which could be different depending on what we're working with. Do I need to make it generic?
The IReport will have one string and a collection of IReportSection.
Here's how I'm trying to define it now.
public interface IReport
{
string ReportName { get; set; }
ICollection<IReportSection> ReportSections { get; }
}
public interface IReportSection
{
string ReportSectionName { get; set; }
ICollection ReportItems { get; }
}
public abstract class ReportSectionBase : IReportSection
{
public string ReportSectionName { get; set; }
public ICollection ReportItems { get; set; }
}
And my models:
pulic class ProjectSubmissionViewModel
{
public int ProjectSubmissionId { get; set; }
public string SubmissionTitle { get; set; }
}
pulic class AffiliateViewModel
{
public int AffiliateId { get; set; }
public string AffiliateName { get; set; }
}
This is how I'm trying to use it in code:
public class ChapterAffiliates : ReportSectionBase
{
public string ReportSectionName { get { return "Chapter Affiliates"; } }
public ICollection<AffiliateViewModel> ReportItems { get; set; }
}
public class ChapterTitles : ReportSectionBase
{
public string ReportSectionName { get { return "Chapter Titles"; } }
public ICollection<ProjectSubmissionViewModel> ReportItems { get; set; }
}
public class SubmissionListViewModel : IReport
{
public ICollection<ProjectSubmissionViewModel> Submissions { get; set; }
public ICollection<AffiliateViewModel> Affiliates{ get; set; }
public string ReportName { get; set; }
public ICollection<IReportSection> ReportSections
{
get
{
var affiliateSection = new ChapterAffiliates
{
ReportItems = Affiliates
};
var titleSection = new ChapterTitles
{
ReportItems = Submissions.Where(s => s.SubmissionTitle.Contains("SomePhrase")).ToList()
};
var sections = new List<IReportSection> { {subSection}, {titleSection} };
return sections;
}
}
}
I'm not sure how to best define this. I'm pretty sure I've done it before, but it's not coming to me.
Are the type parameters for TRType all the same within a certain report? E.g. will you have report sections with different report types in them?
If all types within a report are the same, the solution is relatively simple:
public interface IReport<T> { ... }
If this is not the case - you'll have to do something different, e.g:
public interface IReportSection
{
string ReportSectionName { get; }
ICollection ReportItems { get; }
}
public abstract class ReportSectionBase<TRType> : IReportSection {
...
}
This allows you to put different underlying types in the ReportSections collection related to the report. You'll have to do some more work to get the exact information that you need out of each report section.

How to make a generic list equal another generic list

This is my set up,
class CostPeriodDto : IPeriodCalculation
{
public decimal? a { get; set; }
public decimal? b { get; set; }
public decimal? c { get; set; }
public decimal? d { get; set; }
}
interface IPeriodCalculation
{
decimal? a { get; set; }
decimal? b { get; set; }
}
class myDto
{
public List<CostPeriodDto> costPeriodList{ get; set; }
public List<IPeriodCalculation> periodCalcList
{
get
{
return this.costPeriodList; // compile error
}
}
}
What would be the best way of doing this?
Use Cast<IPeriodCalculation>() :
public class CostPeriodDto : IPeriodCalculation
{
public decimal? a { get; set; }
public decimal? b { get; set; }
public decimal? c { get; set; }
public decimal? d { get; set; }
}
public interface IPeriodCalculation
{
decimal? a { get; set; }
decimal? b { get; set; }
}
public class myDto
{
public List<CostPeriodDto> costPeriodList { get; set; }
public List<IPeriodCalculation> periodCalcList
{
get
{
return this.costPeriodList.Cast<IPeriodCalculation>().ToList();
}
}
}
I believe in C#4, if you were using something implementing IEnumerable<out T>, you could simply do it the way you wrote it, and it would be resolved using Covariance.
class myDto
{
public IEnumerable<CostPeriodDto> costPeriodList{ get; set; }
public IEnumerable<IPeriodCalculation> periodCalcList
{
get
{
return this.costPeriodList; // wont give a compilation error
}
}
}
Try return this.costPeriodList.Cast<IPeriodCalculation>().ToList().
The LINQ methods to cast from one sequence to another will not be equal. That is to say that the following test would fail if you used Cast()/ToList().
Assert.AreSame(myDto.costPeriodList, myDto.periodCalcList);
Furthermore, using those methods means that if you tried to add an item to one collection, they would not be reflected in the other. And every time you called periodCalcList, it would be creating an entirely new collection which could be disastrous depending on how many items, how frequently it's called, etc.
A better solution, in my opinion, is to not use List<T> for holding the CostPeriodDto and instead use a collection derived from Collection<T> and explicitly implement IEnumerable<IPeriodCalculation>. Optionally you could implement IList<IPeriodCalculation> if you needed to.
class CostPeriodDtoCollection :
Collection<CostPeriodDto>,
IEnumerable<IPeriodCalculation>
{
IEnumerable<IPeriodCalculation>.GetEnumerator() {
foreach (IPeriodCalculation item in this) {
yield return item;
}
}
}
class MyDto {
public CostPeriodDtoCollection CostPeriods { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<IPeriodCalculation> PeriodCalcList {
get { return CostPeriods; }
}
}

Categories

Resources