in java I could easily describe an enum with aditional data.
I could describe it something like this
public enum OperatorType
{
GreaterOrEqual (">=", "GreaterOrEqual"),
Greater (">" ,"Greater"),
Less ("<", "Less"),
LessOrEqual ("<=", "LessOrEqual"),
Equal ("==", "Equal"),
Between ("Between", "Between"),
Around ("Around","Around");
private final String symbol;
private final String name;
private OperatorType(final String symbol, final String name) {
this.symbol = symbol;
this.name = name;
}
}
And then add a static method that iterates over values(), adds all data to a hashmap and allow to retrieve from the map full enum data by one of its attriburtes as a key.
In brief, enum is a very developed type in java.
Now,
moving to c#, what are my options?
I want to hold an enum with its attributes, load it to a map, and retreive by key when I need. Do I have anything to assist (like, a singletone for each enum - which is not a good idea).
Thanks.
I would just create a class with public static readonly instances of each type and ditch enums altogether. You can use them as dictionary keys or do whatever you like. If you still intend to map them to an underlying data type (int) then you can create implicit operators for that too.
public class OperatorType
{
private static readonly Dictionary<int, OperatorType> OperatorMapping = new Dictionary<int, OperatorType>();
public static readonly OperatorType GreaterOrEqual = new OperatorType(0, ">=", "GreaterOrEqual");
public static readonly OperatorType Greater = new OperatorType(1, ">", "Greater");
public readonly String symbol;
public readonly String name;
private readonly int underlyingValue;
private OperatorType(int underlyingValue, string symbol, string name) {
this.underlyingValue = underlyingValue;
OperatorMapping[underlyingValue] = this;
this.symbol = symbol;
this.name = name;
}
public static implicit operator int(OperatorType operatorType)
{
return operatorType.underlyingValue;
}
public static implicit operator OperatorType(int value)
{
return OperatorMapping[value];
}
}
Sample usage:
Dictionary<OperatorType, string> operators = new Dictionary<OperatorType, string>();
operators.Add(OperatorType.GreaterOrEqual, "Greater or equal");
Console.WriteLine(operators[OperatorType.GreaterOrEqual]); //"Greater or equal"
OperatorType operatorType = 1;
Console.WriteLine(operatorType.name); //"Greater"
If you don't care about an underlying value, don't include it. Also consider whether or not the Dictionary mapping should be threadsafe for your usage. You can also expose a static IEnumerable<OperatorType> (or other collection) to get all operators defined if you want.
EDIT: On second thought, explicit operators are possibly preferable instead of implicit, both to conform with typical .NET best practices and to better match typical enum conversions.
The most convinient workaround might be to create an extension method to your enum type, and return the associated symbols.
Something like this:
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
tester t = tester.x;
t.testenums();
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
public static class ext
{
public static void testenums(this tester x)
{
Console.WriteLine(x.ToString());
}
}
public enum tester
{
x,
y
}
}
Of course you can write a more complex extension method, with return value, etc, this is just an example how to do it.
You can create an attribute:
public class EnumKeyAttribute : Attribute
{
public string Key { get; set; }
public string Description { get; set; }
public EnumKeyAttribute(string key, string description)
{
this.Key = key;
this.Description = description;
}
}
Then apply it to your enum
public enum OperatorType
{
[EnumKey(">=", "GreaterOrEqual")]
GreaterOrEqual,
[EnumKey(">", "Greater")]
Greater,
[EnumKey("<", "Less")]
Less,
[EnumKey("<=", "LessOrEqual")]
LessOrEqual,
[EnumKey("==", "Equal")]
Equal,
[EnumKey("Between", "Between")]
Between,
[EnumKey("Around", "Around")]
Around
}
To get the attribute data you can use reflection. Below is an example of getting the attribute for "Less"
MemberInfo memberInfo = typeof(OperatorType).GetMember(OperatorType.Less.ToString()).FirstOrDefault();
if(memberInfo != null)
{
EnumKeyAttribute attribute = (EnumKeyAttribute)memberInfo.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(EnumKeyAttribute), false).FirstOrDefault();
Console.WriteLine(attribute.Key);
Console.WriteLine(attribute.Description);
}
But because these enums are not created at runtime you can increase your efficiency by creating a static method that looks up the value in a dictionary. Do this as an extension method for ease of use
public static class KeyFinder
{
private static Dictionary<OperatorType, EnumKeyAttribute> lookupTable =
new Dictionary<OperatorType, EnumKeyAttribute>();
public static EnumKeyAttribute GetKey(this OperatorType type)
{
if (lookupTable.ContainsKey(type))
{
return lookupTable[type];
}
MemberInfo memberInfo = typeof(OperatorType).GetMember(type.ToString()).FirstOrDefault();
if (memberInfo != null)
{
EnumKeyAttribute attribute = (EnumKeyAttribute)memberInfo.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(EnumKeyAttribute), false).FirstOrDefault();
if (attribute != null)
{
lookupTable.Add(type, attribute);
return attribute;
}
}
// add a null value so next time it doesn't use reflection only to find nothing
lookupTable.Add(type, null);
return null;
}
}
So now to get the values you simply do the following:
OperatorType.Less.GetKey().Key
OperatorType.Less.GetKey().Description
Just be careful of null reference exceptions (since it will return null if it can't find an attribute). If you want to find by key you can simply create other extension methods that use the string value as the key.
C# doesn't really have the same feature. However there are several possibilities to get really close (and potentially more flexible as well).
Sticking to regular enums, you could use attributes to enrich with extra information. Of course, this requires reflection to work with that
public enum OperatorType
{
[DisplayName(">=")]
GreaterOrEqual,
// ...
}
There are several patterns to work with this, e.g. http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/28087/DisplayNameAttribute-for-Enumerations, google for more.
Another approach can be to enhance your enumeration types using regular classes:
public class OperatorType
{
public static OperatorType GreaterOrEqual = new OperatorType(">=", "GreaterOrEqual");
// ...
string symbol;
string name;
private OperatorType(string symbol, string name)
{
this.symbol = symbol;
this.name = name;
}
}
This article describes some other ways to work with enum-like types in C#
If you really need the functionality of Java-style enums in C#, I see three reasonable ways to implement it:
Use a C# enum and a static class of helper methods. You lose type safety, but this is an otherwise very workable solution.
Use a C# enum and a set of extension methods. Probably the most idiomatic C# solution, but you still have to deal with the loss of type safety (your extension methods should be able to cope with out-of-range values, even if only by throwing an exception).
Use the type-safe enum pattern that was common in Java before the language gained the enum keyword in Java 5. If you have non-trivial logic for each enum value, this would be my preference.
Related
I have a class containing string constants and a class containing readonly objects representing a counter object. I have created a custom attribute that tags the string constant with the string representation of it's corresponding counter. Is there a good way to link the string const to the counter object using the attribute?
Here is an example of the string const:
public static class OperatorDiagnosticsConstants
{
[CounterType(CounterType = "ReagentProbe1")]
public const string R1_PROBE_CODE = "SACT-158";
}
Here is the class containing the readonly counter objects:
public class MaintenanceCounterType : CounterTypeEnum
{
public static readonly MaintenanceCounterType ReagentProbe1 = new MaintenanceCounterType(MaintenanceCounterTypeConstants.ReagentProbe1ID);
}
I can think of two solutions but wonder if there is a more elegant way?
First is in the code that uses these two classes, I could have a convert method with a switch statement. Switch on the attribute string to return the MaintenanceCounterType
public MaintenanceCounterType Convert(string attributeStr)
{
switch (attributeStr)
{
case "ReagentProbe1":
return MaintenanceCounterType.ReagentProbe1;
......
}
}
Or I think I could add the same custom attribute CounterType to the MaintenanceCounterType and use reflection to match them up. I guess by checking the equality of the string property of the custom attribute?
Looking for a more elegant solution. Thanks!
Instead of trying to use that approach, you might consider using C# enums, which have functionality in the API for converting between enum constants and strings.
Converting an enum constant to a string (API):
public class ConvertEnumToStringExample {
enum Colors { Red, Green, Blue, Yellow };
public static void Main() {
Console.WriteLine("The 4th value of the Colors Enum is {0}", Enum.GetName(typeof(Colors), 3));
Console.WriteLine("The 4th value of the Colors Enum is {0}", Enum.GetName(typeof(Colors), Colors.Yellow));
}
}
Converting a string to an enum constant (API):
public class ConvertStringToEnumExample {
enum Colors { Red, Green, Blue, Yellow };
public static void Main() {
string colorString = "Yellow";
Colors colorValue = (Colors) Enum.Parse(typeof(Colors), colorString);
// colorValue is now Colors.Yellow
}
}
An immediate drop in improvement would be to use the nameof operator, so that the link survives any refactoring/renaming:
[CounterType(CounterType = nameof(MaintenanceCounterType.ReagentProbe1)]
public const string R1_PROBE_CODE = "SACT-158";
The convert method can also be simplified using reflection, as you suggested:
public MaintenanceCounterType Convert(string attributeStr)
{
return typeof (MaintenanceCounterType).GetField(attributeStr);
}
That being said, my preferred option in these situations is to replace the string constants with a new class:
public static class OperatorDiagnosticsConstant
{
public readonly string Value;
public readonly MaintenanceCounterType CounterType;
private OperatorDiagnosticsConstant(string value, MaintenanceCounterType counterType)
{
Value = value;
CounterType = counterType;
}
public static OperatorDiagnosticsConstant R1_PROBE_CODE = new OperatorDiagnosticsConstant("SACT-158", MaintenanceCounterType.ReagentProbe1);
}
If you want to attempt to maintain backwards compatibility with existing code that calls OperatorDiagnosticsConstants.R1_PROBE_CODE, you can add an implicit string cast operator:
public static class OperatorDiagnosticsConstant
{
...
public override stirng ToString()
{
return Value;
}
public static implicit operator string(OperatorDiagnosticsConstant constant)
{
return constant.ToString();
}
}
I have enum:
enum MyEnum{
aaaVal1,
aaaVal2,
aaaVal3,
}
I need to have abbreviated version of 'MyEnum' which maps every item from 'MyEnum' to different values. My current approach is method which simply translates every item:
string translate(MyEnum myEnum)
{
string result = "";
switch ((int)myEnum)
{
0: result = "abc";
1: result = "dft";
default: result = "fsdfds"
}
return result;
}
the problem with this approach is that every time programmer changes MyEnum he should also change translate method.
This is not a good way of programming.
So..
Is there any more elegant solution for this problem?
Thank you :-)
Four options:
Decorate your enum values with attributes, e.g.
enum MyEnum
{
[Description("abc")]
AaaVal1,
[Description("dft")]
AaaVal2,
AaaVal3,
}
Then you can create a mapping (like the dictionary solution below) via reflection.
Keep the switch statement but switch on the enum value instead of a number for better readability:
switch (myEnum)
{
case MyEnum.AaaVal1: return "abc";
case MyEnum.AaaVal2: return "dft";
default: return "fsdfds";
}
Create a Dictionary<MyEnum, string>:
private static Dictionary<MyEnum, string> EnumDescriptions =
new Dictionary<MyEnum, string>
{
{ MyEnum.AaaVal1, "abc" },
{ MyEnum.AaaVal2, "dft" },
};
You'd need to handle the defaulting in the method, of course.
Use a resource file, with an entry for each string representation. This would be better if you're really trying to translate in a way that might need different translations for different cultures.
Considering that the use of descriptors on enums is quite common, here it's a good-enough class to do it:
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Field, AllowMultiple = false)]
class EnumDescriptor : Attribute
{
public readonly string Description;
public EnumDescriptor(string description)
{
this.Description = description;
}
public static string GetFromValue<T>(T value) where T : struct
{
var type = typeof(T);
var memInfo = type.GetField(value.ToString());
var attributes = memInfo.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(EnumDescriptor), false);
if (attributes.Length == 0)
{
return null;
}
return ((EnumDescriptor)attributes[0]).Description;
}
}
enum MyEnum
{
[EnumDescriptor("Hello")]
aaaVal1,
aaaVal2,
aaaVal3,
}
string translate(MyEnum myEnum)
{
// The ?? operator returns the left value unless the lv is null,
// if it's null it returns the right value.
string result = EnumDescriptor.GetFromValue(myEnum) ?? "fsdfds";
return result;
}
I'm finding what you're trying to do a bit weird.
If you're making translations, then you should create a RESX file and create ACTUAL translations.
But to answer your question, I guess you could create another enum with the same amount of fields and same numbering (if you're using anything other than the default) and have that act as the abbreviated names. Connecting one to the other should be straightforward:
string GetAbbreviation(Enum1 enum1)
{
return ((Enum2)((int)enum1)).ToString();
}
Attributes will be nice solution for this case. You can specify translations for enumeration members via declarative way:
public class TranslateAttribute
{
public string Translation { get; private set; }
public TranslateAttribute(string translation)
{
Translation = translation;
}
}
enum MyEnum
{
[Translate("abc")]
aaaVal1,
[Translate("dft")]
aaaVal2,
[Translate("fsdfds")]
aaaVal3
}
After this you should write common method for obtaining translations. It should check attribute with translation (via reflection) and return translation if it was specified and default value in other cases.
I need my enum to return a specific string, but I can't work out how to make it return a string with breaks in it without having a method to do the conversion. Is it possible to make LicenseTypes.DISCOUNT_EARLY_ADOPTER return DISCOUNT EARLY-ADOPTER without the helper method?
// All license types
public enum LicenseTypes
{
DISCOUNT,
DISCOUNT_EARLY_ADOPTER,
COMMERCIAL,
COMMERCIAL_EARLY_ADOPTER
}
// Convert enum to correct string
public static string LicenseTypeToString(LicenseTypes Enum)
{
if (Enum == LicenseTypes.COMMERCIAL)
return "COMMERCIAL";
else if (Enum == LicenseTypes.COMMERCIAL_EARLY_ADOPTER)
return "COMMERCIAL EARLY-ADOPTER";
else if (Enum == LicenseTypes.DISCOUNT)
return "DISCOUNT";
else if (Enum == LicenseTypes.DISCOUNT_EARLY_ADOPTER)
return "DISCOUNT EARLY-ADOPTER";
else
return "ERROR";
}
Firstly, a separate option from a helper method is simply to have a Dictionary<LicenseTypes, string> which you populate once. That would probably be the simplest approach, to be honest:
private static readonly Dictionary<LicenseTypes, string> LicenseDesciptions =
new Dictionary<LicenseTypes, string>
{
{ LicenseTypes.COMMERCIAL, "COMMERCIAL" },
{ LicenseTypes.COMMERCIAL_EARLY_ADOPTER, "COMMERCIAL EARLY-ADOPTER" },
{ LicenseTypes.DOMESTIC, "DOMESTIC" },
{ LicenseTypes.DOMESTIC_EARLY_ADOPTER, "DOMESTIC EARLY-ADOPTER" },
};
(As noted in comments, another alternative is a switch/case... but I personally prefer this way, as effectively you've got a data mapping, so it makes sense to use a data structure rather than an execution flow structure. It also means you can swap out dictionaries for different languages etc if you want.)
Secondly, one option would be to decorate each enum value with a [Description] attribute (or your own attribute if you want), and find that out with reflection - Unconstrained Melody has an extension method which can do that very easily:
// Throws ArgumentOutOfRangeException if the licenseType value isn't defined
// or doesn't have a description.
string description = licenseType.GetDescription();
Also, following .NET naming conventions it should be:
public enum LicenseType // Singular as it's not a Flags enum
{
Discount,
DiscountEarlyAdopter,
Commercial,
CommercialEarlyAdopter
}
A little reflection, and Attribute magic, and this should just answer it :)
Getting attributes of Enum's value
Might also make it an extension method.
here's how it should look (also added generics):
public static class MyExtensionsClass
{
public static string ToDescriptionString<T>(this T val)
where T : struct, IConvertible
{
if (typeof(T).IsEnum)
{
var type = val.GetType();
var memInfo = type.GetMember(val.ToString());
var attributes = memInfo[0].GetCustomAttributes(typeof(DescriptionAttribute), false);
return ((DescriptionAttribute)attributes[0]).Description;
}
return ""; //all paths must return a value
}
}
public enum LicenseTypes
{
[Description("DISCOUNT")]
DISCOUNT,
[Description("DISCOUNT EARLY-ADOPTER")]
DISCOUNT_EARLY_ADOPTER,
[Description("COMMERCIAL")]
COMMERCIAL,
[Description("COMMERCIAL EARLY-ADOPTER")]
COMMERCIAL_EARLY_ADOPTER
}
Thank you, guys that wrote these:
Enhance enums using extension methods
Create Generic method constraining T to an Enum
Good luck!
While it doesn't eliminate the helper method, note that in your case you could just special-case the values that you can't get using ToString:
switch (Enum) {
case LicenseTypes.COMMERCIAL_EARLY_ADOPTER:
return "COMMERCIAL EARLY-ADOPTER";
case LicenseTypes.DISCOUNT_EARLY_ADOPTER:
return "DISCOUNT EARLY-ADOPTER";
default
return Enum.ToString();
}
I use this from Google's dotnet client - StringValueAttribute.cs
and Utilities.cs
public enum LicenseType
{
[StringValue("DISCOUNT")] Discount,
[StringValue("DISCOUNT EARLY-ADOPTER")] DiscountEarlyAdopter,
[StringValue("COMMERCIAL")] Commercial,
[StringValue("COMMERCIAL EARLY-ADOPTER")] CommercialEarlyAdopter
}
Then you can simply do this:
licenseType.GetStringValue();
Convert to string using "G" format, then replace "_" (underscore) with spaces:
LicensceTypes license = LicenseTypes.COMMERCIAL_EARLY_ADOPTERS;
string licenseDescription = license.ToString("G").Replace('_', ' ');
// licenseDescription = "COMMERCIAL EARLY ADOPTERS"
I think I would use a class to avoid this scenario. :/
public class LicenceType
{
private string name;
public LicenceType(string Name)
{
this.name = Name;
}
public override string ToString()
{
return name;
}
}
public static class LicenceTypes
{
public static LicenceType DISCOUNT = new LicenceType("DISCOUNT");
public static LicenceType DISCOUNT_EARLY_ADOPTER= new LicenceType("DISCOUNT EARLY-ADOPTER");
public static LicenceType COMMERCIAL= new LicenceType("COMMERCIAL");
public static LicenceType COMMERCIAL_EARLY_ADOPTER= new LicenceType("COMMERCIAL EARLY-ADOPTER");
}
I have a set of custom data types that can be used to manipulate basic blocks of data. For example:
MyTypeA Foo = new MyTypeA();
Foo.ParseString(InputString);
if (Foo.Value > 4) return;
Some of these types define read-only properties that describe aspects of the types (for example a name, bit size, etc.).
In my custom framework I want to be able to provide these types to the user for use in their applications but I also want to give the user a list of the available types which they could easily bind to a combobox. My current approach:
public static class DataTypes
{
static ReadOnlyCollection<MyDataType> AvailableTypes;
static DataTypes()
{
List<MyDataType> Types = new List<MyDataType>();
Types.Add(new MyTypeA());
Types.Add(new MyTypeB());
AvailableTypes = new ReadOnlyCollection<MyDataType>(Types);
}
}
What concerns me about this is that the user might obtain a type from the AvailableTypes list (by selecting a combobox item for example) and then use that reference directly rather than creating a clone of the type and using their own reference.
How can I make the list of available types read only so that it doesn't allow any writing or changes to the type instances, forcing the user to create their own clone?
Alternatively is there a better way of providing a list of available types?
Thanks, Andy
Make your custom Type class immutable, same as System.Type and you dont have to worry. A end user can fetch all the data it wants but he can not modify the object in any way.
EDIT: Example of immutable class
Take the following class for instance:
public class ImmutablePerson
{
private readonly string name; //readonly ensures the field can only be set in the object's constructor(s).
private readonly int age;
public ImmutablePerson(string name, int age)
{
this.name = name;
this.age = age;
}
public int Age { get { return this.age; } } //no setter
public string Name { get { return this.name; } }
public ImmutablePerson GrowUp(int years)
{
return new ImmutablePerson(this.name, this.age + years); //does not modify object state, it returns a new object with the new state.
}
}
ImmutablePerson is an immutable class. Once created there is no way a consumer can modify it in any way. Notice that the GrowUp(int years) method does not modify the state of the object at all, it just returns a new instance of ImmutablePerson with the new values.
I hope this helps you understand immutable objects a little better and how they can help you in your particular case.
To get around the problems you've mentioned, you could create a wrapper around your instances, and have the wrapper provide the functionality you require.
For example:
public class TypeDescriptor
{
private MyDataType _dataType;
public TypeDescriptor(MyDataType dataType)
{
_dataType = dataType;
}
public override string ToString()
{
return _dataType.ToString();
}
}
You class would then look something like:
public static class DataTypes
{
public static ReadOnlyCollection<TypeDescriptor> AvailableTypes;
static DataTypes()
{
List<TypeDescriptor> Types = new List<TypeDescriptor>();
Types.Add(new TypeDescriptor(new MyTypeA()));
Types.Add(new TypeDescriptor(new MyTypeB()));
AvailableTypes = new ReadOnlyCollection<TypeDescriptor>(Types);
}
}
Binding to the list and relying on the ToString() will now result in your data types ToString being called.
Create a list of types rather than a list of instances. e.g.
List<Type> Types = new List<Type>();
Types.Add(typeof(MyTypeA));
Types.Add(typeof(MyTypeB()));
etc.
To answer the comment on binding to a drop down list:
MyDropDown.Datasource = Type.Select(t => t.Name);
MyDropDown.DataBind();
This will not use the custom property of your classes but it will give you the simple calss name without all the other guff e.g. MyTypeA
A collection cannot "inject" type modifiers into its members. The collection you have declared is readonly. If you want MyDataType to be readonly you must declare that way.
Somthing like :
EDIT extended class to have a parse method
public class MyDataType
{
private MyDataType()
{
...
}
internal static MyDataType Parse(string someString)
{
MyDataType newOne = new MyDataType();
newOne.Value = ... //int.Parse(someString); ?
}
public int Value { get; private set; }
}
If the collection stays generic there is no readonly constraint.
You would use it like this, following your example.
MyTypeA foo = MyTypeA.Parse(inputString);
if (foo.Value > 4) return;
You probably shouldn't store instances of your types in the list. Instead you can store types. These can be used to create instances:
public static class DataTypes
{
static ReadOnlyCollection<Type> AvailableTypes;
static DataTypes()
{
List<Type> Types = new List<Type>();
Types.Add(typeof(MyTypeA));
Types.Add(typeof(MyTypeB));
AvailableTypes = new ReadOnlyCollection<MyDataType>(Type);
}
}
You can use Activator.CreateInstance to create a concrete instance:
Object myType = Activator.CreateInstance(AvailableTypes[0]);
Unless your types share a common base type you cannot downcast the result and an Object isn't that useful.
Also the use of the term type in your code makes my example a bit confusing as I suggest you store the types of something called type.
You could consider creating and attribute that you then can apply to MyTypeA, MyTypeB etc. Then you can build the AvailableTypes using reflection and the list will always be up to date with your code. E.g. if you add MyTypeC and use the attribute it will automatically be added to the list.
You can also add a display string property to the attribute and use that for display in the combo box. If you want to do that you should store a small object combining the type and the display string in AvailableTypes.
Here is an example. Using generic words like type and data can be confusing so to pick a random name I just use foo. Obviously you should use a more descriptive name.
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class, Inherited = false)]
sealed class FooAttribute : Attribute {
public FooAttribute(String displayName) {
DisplayName = displayName;
}
public String DisplayName { get; private set; }
}
You can decorate you classes using this attribute:
[Foo("Type A")]
class MyTypeA { ... }
[Foo("Type B")]
class MyTypeB { ... }
For the combobox you want a list of factory objects with a nice ToString implementation (this class can be improved by adding some error handling which I have left out to save space):
class FooFactory {
readonly Type type;
public FooFactory(Type type) {
this.type = type;
DisplayName = ((FooAttribute) Attribute.GetCustomAttribute(
type,
typeof(FooAttribute))
).DisplayName;
}
public String DisplayName { get; private set; }
public Object CreateFoo() {
return Activator.CreateInstance(this.type);
}
public override String ToString() {
return DisplayName;
}
}
Returning Object from CreateFoo isn't very useful but that is a separate issue.
You can build this list at run-time:
var factories = Assembly
.GetExecutingAssembly()
.GetTypes()
.Where(t => Attribute.IsDefined(t, typeof(FooAttribute)))
.Select(t => new FooFactory(t));
I'm not exactly sure of what you want but should something like this be ok ?
public static class DataTypes
{
static Dictionary<string,Type> AvailableTypes
= new Dictionary<string,Type>()
{
{ "MyTypeA", MyTypeA },
{ "MyTypeB", MyTypeB },
...
};
}
That is actually return types instead of sample instances of theses types. Thus you would be sure that only new instances would be created by the user of your class.
Then in the calling code :
MyTypeA a = Activator.CreateInstance(DataTypes.AvailableTypes["MyTypeA"]);
Say I have an enum something like:
enum OrderStatus
{
AwaitingAuthorization,
InProduction,
AwaitingDespatch
}
I've also created an extension method on my enum to tidy up the displayed values in the UI, so I have something like:
public static string ToDisplayString(this OrderStatus status)
{
switch (status)
{
case Status.AwaitingAuthorization:
return "Awaiting Authorization";
case Status.InProduction:
return "Item in Production";
... etc
}
}
Inspired by the excellent post here, I want to bind my enums to a SelectList with an extension method:
public static SelectList ToSelectList<TEnum>(this TEnum enumObj)
however, to use the DisplayString values in the UI drop down I'd need to add a constraint along the lines of
: where TEnum has extension ToDisplayString
Obviously none of this is going to work at all with the current approach, unless there's some clever trick I don't know about.
Does anyone have any ideas about how I might be able to implement something like this?
Is there a compelling reason to use an enum here?
When you start jumping through crazy hoops to use enums, it might be time to use a class.
public class OrderStatus
{
OrderStatus(string display) { this.display = display; }
string display;
public override string ToString(){ return display; }
public static readonly OrderStatus AwaitingAuthorization
= new OrderStatus("Awaiting Authorization");
public static readonly OrderStatus InProduction
= new OrderStatus("Item in Production");
public static readonly OrderStatus AwaitingDispatch
= new OrderStatus("Awaiting Dispatch");
}
You consume it the same as an enum:
public void AuthorizeAndSendToProduction(Order order, ProductionQueue queue)
{
if(order.Status != OrderStatus.AwaitingAuthorization)
{
Console.WriteLine("This order is not awaiting authorization!");
return;
}
order.Status = OrderStatus.InProduction;
queue.Enqueue(order);
}
The string representation is built-in, and all you need is ToString().
Of course, you can use the DisplayAttribute to annotate your Enums.
enum OrderStatus
{
[Display(Description="Long Desc", Name="Awaiting Authorization", ShortName="Wait Auth")]
AwaitingAuthorization,
[Display(Description="...", Name="...", ShortName="...")]
InProduction,
[Display(Description="...", Name="...", ShortName="...")]
AwaitingDespatch
}
You can also opt to create an extension method taking any enumeration value and returning its display name based on the attribute set to it to tidy up the displayed values in the UI, as follows:
public static class EnumExtensions
{
public static string ToName(this Enum enumValue)
{
var displayAttribute = enumValue.GetType()
.GetMember(enumValue.ToString())[0]
.GetCustomAttributes(false)
.Select(a => a as DisplayAttribute)
.FirstOrDefault();
return displayAttribute?.Name ?? enumValue.ToString();
}
}
With
public enum Test
{
[Display(Name="AAA")]
a,
b
}
Code:
Console.WriteLine(Test.a.ToName());
Console.WriteLine(Test.b.ToName());
Results
AAA
b
I want to bind my enums to a SelectList with an extension method:
For type safety, I wouldn't use an extension methods, but instead a static class that deals with the Enum type:
Pre C# 7.3 version. Since Enum is not a valid type constraint prior to 7.3 (and it would cause a compile-time exception), you'll end up by considering that enums are value types and they implement some interfaces, in order to restrict the type parameter as close to Enum as possible.
public static class Enums<TEnum> where TEnum : struct, IComparable, IFormattable, IConvertible
{
static Enums()
{
if (!typeof(TEnum).IsEnum)
{
throw new InvalidOperationException();
}
}
}
C# 7.3+ version, with compile time checking... yay!
public static class Enums<TEnum> where TEnum : Enum
{
}
GetValues Method for the class:
public static IEnumerable<TEnum> GetValues(bool includeFirst)
{
var result = ((TEnum[])Enum.GetValues(typeof(TEnum))).ToList();
if (!includeZero)
result = result.Where(r => r != default).ToList();
return result;
}
If you follow Enum Guidelines and include the Default (zero) value, we can ignore it (sometimes we want to display the value like "None Selected" and sometimes we don't "Invalid Selection").
Then we can add another method:
public static IEnumerable<string> GetNames(bool includeFirst)
{
var result = GetValue(includeFirst)
.Select(v => v.ToName())
.ToList();
return result;
}
Instead of using "ToDisplayString", simply override ToString() of your enum. So if an enum overrides it it will take it, otherwise it will take the default ToString behavior (in ToSelectList).
If you just need to use relatively tiny enumerate classes that have no more than an explicit casting operator, ToString and do not take other usability for the special ones about enum on System and its derived namespaces, then the following example could be a solution:
namespace MyNamespace {
public abstract class EnumerateClass<Type, InheritingClass> : IEquatable<InheritingClass>
where Type : IEquatable<Type>
where InheritingClass : EnumerateClass<Type, InheritingClass> {
internal readonly Type Identifier;
protected EnumerateClass (Type identifier) {
this.Identifier = identifier;
}
public bool Equals(InheritingClass obj)
=> this.Identifier.Equals(obj.Identifier);
public static explicit operator Type(EnumerateClass<Type, InheritingClass> obj)
=> obj.Identifier;
}
public sealed class MyNumber : EnumerateClass<int, MyNumber> {
private MyNumber(int identifier) : base(identifier) { }
public static readonly MyNumber None = new Number(0);
public static readonly MyNumber One = new Number(1);
public static readonly MyNumber Two = new Number(2);
...
public override string ToString() {
switch (this.Identifier) {
case 0: return "None";
case 1: return "One";
case 2: return "Two";
...
}
}
}
}
You could do this:
public static string ToOrderStatusDisplayString(this Enum status)
{
switch ((OrderStatus)status)
{
...
}
}
Then restrict TEnum to Enum: where TEnum : System.Enum
Of course, that way you get a bunch of methods on the Enum itself and lose type safety.