I am keeping track of values in a console. Two people "duel" against each other and I was using a dictionary to keep the names recorded along with damage done.
var duels = new Dictionary<string, string>();
duels.Add("User1", "50");
duels.Add("User2","34");
I'm trying to store both users in the same dictionary row, so it could be verified as User1 is dueling against User2. This way if another duel started, it would not interfere with User1 or User2.
duels.Add("KeyUser1","KeyUser2","50","34",.../*Other attributes of the duel*/);
I need two keys so I can check where the user's damage will go. The damage will always go to the other key--vice versa.
What can I do to make this work?
Thank you.
public class Duel
{
public string User1 {get; protected set;}
public string User2 {get; protected set;}
public Duel(string user1, string user2)
{
User1 = user1;
User2 = user2;
}
public HashSet<string> GetUserSet()
{
HashSet<string> result = new HashSet<string>();
result.Add(this.User1);
result.Add(this.User2);
return result;
}
//TODO ... more impl
}
Let's make some duels. CreateSetComparer allows the dictionary to use the values of the set for equality testing.
List<Duel> duelSource = GetDuels();
Dictionary<HashSet<string>, Duel> duels =
new Dictionary<HashSet<string>, Duel>(HashSet<string>.CreateSetComparer());
foreach(Duel d in duelSource)
{
duels.Add(d.GetUserSet(), d);
}
And finding a duel:
HashSet<string> key = new HashSet<string>();
key.Add("User1");
key.Add("User2");
Duel myDuel = duels[key];
You could try making a custom data type for the key:
class DualKey<T> : IEquatable<DualKey<T>> where T : IEquatable<T>
{
public T Key0 { get; set; }
public T Key1 { get; set; }
public DualKey(T key0, T key1)
{
Key0 = key0;
Key1 = key1;
}
public override int GetHashCode()
{
return Key0.GetHashCode() ^ Key1.GetHashCode();
}
public bool Equals(DualKey<T> obj)
{
return (this.Key0.Equals(obj.Key0) && this.Key1.Equals(obj.Key1))
|| (this.Key0.Equals(obj.Key1) && this.Key0.Equals(obj.Key0));
}
}
Then use a Dictionary<DualKey<string>, string>;
Something quick.
class UserScores {
public string Key { get; set; }
public int User1Score { get; set; }
public int User2Score { get; set; }
public UserScores(string username1, string username2)
{
Key = username1 + ":" + username2;
}
}
void Main()
{
var userScore = new UserScores("fooUser", "barUser");
var scores = new Dictionary<string, UserScores>();
scores.Add(userScore.Key, userScore);
// Or use a list
var list = new List<UserScores>();
list.Add(userScore);
list.Single (l => l.Key == userScore.Key);
}
Although a proper solution in my opinion would use a better thought out UserScores object that tracks that particular "duel" session.
Since a single person can be involved in at most one duel at a time, you can use a single dictionary to directly "index" both endpoints in all duels, something like this:
class Duel {
public Duel(string user1, string user2) {
Debug.Assert(user1 != user2);
User1 = user1;
User2 = user2;
}
public readonly string User1;
public readonly string User2;
public int User1Score;
public int User2Score;
}
class Program {
static void Main(string[] args) {
var dict = new Dictionary<string, Duel>();
// Add a new duel. A single duel has two keys in the dictionary, one for each "endpoint".
var duel = new Duel("Jon", "Rob");
dict.Add(duel.User1, duel);
dict.Add(duel.User2, duel);
// Find Jon's score, without knowing in advance whether Jon is User1 or User2:
var jons_duel = dict["Jon"];
if (jons_duel.User1 == "Jon") {
// Use jons_duel.User1Score.
}
else {
// Use jons_duel.User2Score.
}
// You can just as easily find Rob's score:
var robs_duel = dict["Rob"];
if (robs_duel.User1 == "Rob") {
// Use robs_duel.User1Score.
}
else {
// Use robs_duel.User2Score.
}
// You are unsure whether Nick is currently duelling:
if (dict.ContainsKey("Nick")) {
// Yup!
}
else {
// Nope.
}
// If Jon tries to engage in another duel while still duelling Rob:
var duel2 = new Duel("Jon", "Nick");
dict.Add(duel2.User1, duel); // Exception! Jon cannot be engaged in more than 1 duel at a time.
dict.Add(duel2.User2, duel); // NOTE: If exception happens here instead of above, don't forget remove User1 from the dictionary.
// Removing the duel requires removing both endpoints from the dictionary:
dict.Remove(jons_duel.User1);
dict.Remove(jons_duel.User2);
// Etc...
}
}
This is just a basic idea, you might consider wrapping this functionality in your own class...
Related
I have a public Dictionary<string, PostRenewalActionJobs> Jobs to store some actions I would like to trigger for specific accounts, the key of this dictionary being the account name.
public class PostRenewalActionJobs
{
public List<AlterDatabaseLinkJob> AlterDataBaseLink { get; set; }
public DatabaseConnectionCheckJob DatabaseConnectionCheck { get; set; }
public UnlockDatabaseAccountJob UnlockDatabaseAccount { get; set; }
public LinuxConnectionCheckJob LinuxConnectionCheck { get; set; }
public WindowsConnectionCheckJob WindowsConnectionCheck { get; set; }
public ReplacePasswordInFileJob ReplacePasswordInFile { get; set; }
}
The properties of PostRenewalActionJobs type (AlterDataBaseLink, DatabaseConnectionCheck, etc) can be defined for a specific account or for all accounts by using * as key in the dictionary:
By using below method I am able to retrieve the jobs for an account (if exists) or the general jobs:
public PostRenewalActionJobs GetJobsForAccount(string accountName)
{
return Jobs.ContainsKey(accountName) ? Jobs[accountName] : Jobs["*"];
}
I would like to have a dynamic way of getting a job from the all accounts object ("*") if the one from the specific account is null.
Something like below but whit out repeating the same code for all job types and also a solution that should work when new job types are introduced.
var dbConCheckJob = GetJobsForAccount("someAccount").AlterDataBaseLink;
if(dbConCheckJob == null || !dbConCheckJob.Any())
{
dbConCheckJob = GetJobsForAccount("*").AlterDataBaseLink
}
I was thinking to use some reflection, but I am not sure how to do it.
You don't need to use reflection. You can already determine whether to get the specific jobs for an account or the generic ones, you could then use a Func to get the job you want:
public TJob GetPostJobForAccount<TJob>(string accountName,
Func<PostRenewalActionJobs, TJob> jobSelector) where TJob : JobBase
{
var genericJobs = Jobs["*"];
var accountJobs = Jobs.ContainsKey(accountName) ? Jobs[accountName] : genericJobs;
// Account might be defined but without any job of the given type
// hence selecting from the defaults if need be
return jobSelector(accountJobs) ?? jobSelector(genericJobs);
}
var bobJob = GetPostJobForAccount("bob", x => x.WindowsConnectionCheck);
var aliceJob = GetPostJobForAccount("alice", x => x.UnlockDatabaseAccount);
I found a way to do it, not sure if there is a better way:
public TJob GetPostJobForAccount<TJob>(string accountName)
{
Type type = typeof(PostRenewalActionJobs);
var accountJobs = Jobs[accountName];
var generalJobs = Jobs["*"];
foreach (var item in type.GetProperties())
{
var itemType = item.PropertyType;
var currentType = typeof(TJob);
if (itemType != currentType)
{
continue;
}
var output = (TJob)accountJobs?.GetType()?.GetProperty(item.Name)?.GetValue(accountJobs, null);
if (output is null)
{
output = (TJob)accountJobs?.GetType()?.GetProperty(item.Name)?.GetValue(generalJobs, null);
}
return output;
}
return default;
}
I'm doing a simple program to add a student(with ID,Name) to a List, then to search Student by ID through session.
Add Student Module is like below,
protected void addStudent(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
List<Student> thisstdlist = new List<Student>();
thisstdlist = (List<Student>)Session["stdlist"];
thisstdlist.Add(new Student(txtsid.Text,txtsname.Text));
Session["stdlist"] = thisstdlist;
Response.Redirect("Home.aspx");
}
Search Student Module is Like Below,
protected void searchStudent(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
foreach (Student element in (List<Student>)Session["stdlist"])
{
if(element.getID().Equals(txtstdid.Text)){
txtstdname.Text = element.getName();
}
}
}
Student Class is like below,
public class Student
{
private String Name;
private String ID;
public Student(String sid, String sn) {
this.Name = sn;
this.ID = sid;
}
public String getName() {
return this.Name;
}
public String getID()
{
return this.ID;
}
}
But when I added students, for ex: 100,John and Search by 100 it gives me no result. Please can anyone show me the mistake or the correct way of doing this.
are you setting breakpoints and actually checking what the values of these lists and what is actually stored in the session?
.Equals() is not doing what you think it is
try :
foreach (Student element in (List<Student>)Session["stdlist"])
{
if(element.ID == txtstdid.Text){
txtstdname.Text = element.getName();
}
}
The add Student module won't initialize the student list correctly - you are creating a new List<Student> and then throwing the new list away with the next line assignment. I would go with something like:
var thisstdlist = (List<Student>)Session["stdlist"];
// If a key isn't found in Session, it will be null ..
if (thisstdlist == null)
{
// i.e. only re-initialize if it was missing from session
thisstdlist = new List<Student>();
// You don't need to continually reassign the session variable
Session["stdlist"] = thisstdlist;
}
// Adds to the list; now that Session also has a reference to the same list
thisstdlist.Add(new Student(txtsid.Text,txtsname.Text));
As per the comment, note that c# has automatic (albeit mutable) properties - you don't need the Java-style getters and setters.
public class Student
{
public Student(string sid, string sn)
{
Name = sn;
ID = sid;
}
public string Name
{
get;
set;
}
public string ID
{
get;
set;
}
}
Also, in .Net, == for strings is overridden to test values (unlike Java's reference equality for strings), so you can rewrite the comparison as:
if (element.ID == txtstdid.Text)
{
txtstdname.Text = element.Name;
}
Re : foreach - I guess means that you are using the List in a Dictionary (HashMap) fashion - if you use Dictionary instead of List - this will allow you do remove the foreach in favour of:
// addStudent ...
var txtstdname = new Dictionary<string, Student>();
// ...
txtstdname.Add(txtsid.Text, new Student(txtsid.Text,txtsname.Text))
// searchStudent ...
Student element = null;
if (txtstdname.TryGetValue(out element))
{
txtstdname.Text = element.Name();
}
I have a List. This collection holds an object containing the properties of a class.
I want a distinct value of list with respect to any specific property of a class. I have attached some sample code; please check & let me know if you guys have any solutions:
class Test
{
public string firstname{get;set;}
public string lastname{get;set;}
}
class Usetheaboveclass
{
Test objTest=new Test();
List<Test> lstTest=new List<Test>();
objTest.firstname="test";
objTest.lastname="testing";
//Now i want a distinct value with respect to lastname.if i use
lstTest=lstTest.Distinct().Tolist();
//It will process according to all properties.
}
Can you suggest me a way to do this?
Try this approach.
var distinct = lstTest.GroupBy(item => item.lastname).Select(item => item.First()).ToList();
If you only need to do this for one property, override the Equals and GetHashCode methods in Test. These are what Distinct() uses to define duplicates.
If you need to do this for multiple properties, define an IEqualityComparer (the usage is documented in this MSDN article).
Or , you can implement a custom comparer
public class LastNameComparer : IEqualityComparer<Test>
{
public bool Equals(Test x, Test y)
{
if (x == null)
return y == null;
return x.lastname == y.lastname;
}
public int GetHashCode(Test obj)
{
if (obj == null)
return 0;
return obj.lastname.GetHashCode();
}
}
Then , use it like
lstTest = lstTest.Distinct(new LastNameComparer()).ToList();
You can use overloaded version of Distinct. Please see sample code below:
internal class Test
{
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
}
internal class LastNameComparer : IEqualityComparer<Test>
{
bool IEqualityComparer<Test>.Equals(Test x, Test y)
{
if (x.LastName == y.LastName)
return true;
return false;
}
int IEqualityComparer<Test>.GetHashCode(Test obj)
{
return 0; // hashcode...
}
}
private static void Main(string[] args)
{
Test objTest = new Test {FirstName = "Perry", LastName = "Joe"};
Test objTest1 = new Test {FirstName = "Prince", LastName = "Joe"};
Test objTest2 = new Test { FirstName = "Prince", LastName = "Jim" };
List<Test> lstTest = new List<Test> {objTest, objTest1, objTest2};
var distinct = lstTest.Distinct(new LastNameComparer()).ToList();
foreach (var test in distinct)
{
Console.WriteLine(test.LastName);
}
Console.Read();
}
Output of this will be:
Joe
Jim
I'm trying to write some activities with C# instead of the designer and XAML. VS2010 has been buggy and very slow for that, and it also has very poor compilation support (for variables names, properties and so on).
So I'm trying to create activities by inheriting from the Activity class directly, but I'm encountering a snag.
Here's my code:
public class TestActivity : Activity
{
public InArgument<string> Username { get; set; }
public InArgument<string> Password { get; set; }
public OutArgument<bool> ValidCredential { get; set; }
public OutArgument<ProvisioningRole> Role { get; set; }
public OutArgument<Guid> Guid { get; set; }
protected override Func<Activity> Implementation
{
get
{
return () =>
{
return new Sequence()
{
Activities =
{
new AuthenticateUserActivity()
{
Username = this.Username,
Password = this.Password,
Guid = this.Guid,
Result = this.ValidCredential
},
new If()
{
Condition = this.ValidCredential,
Then = new GetUserRoleActivity()
{
Username = this.Username,
Password = this.Password,
Result = this.Role
}
},
}
};
};
}
set { base.Implementation = value; }
}
}
The problem is with the If(), the condition. It's supposed to be an InArgument, but this.ValidCredential is an OutArgument. I've tried creating a Variable, assign the value of ValidCredential to it. I also tried to put the result of AuthenticateUserActivity in the variable and then assign it to ValidCredential, but I get an error saying the To property of Assign needs to be specified.
I've looked around for proper tutorials, but all I found was an MSDN article that had a quick and dirty code implementation, and it used literals instead of the passed arguments, so no help from there.
I found out how to do it. You just need to create new InArgument from the original one. There is a constructor that takes an expression for it.
Username = new InArgument<bool>((ActivityContext c) => this.ValidCredential.Get(c))
So I changed my whole activity to
return new CompensableActivity()
{
Body = new Sequence()
{
Activities =
{
new AuthenticateUserActivity()
{
Username = this.Username.In(),
Password = this.Password.In(),
Guid = this.Guid.Out(),
Result = this.ValidCredential.Out()
},
new If(this.ValidCredential.In())
{
Then = new GetUserRoleActivity()
{
Username = this.Username.In(),
Password = this.Password.In(),
Result = this.Role.Out()
},
Else = new Assign<ProvisioningRole>()
{
To = this.Role.Out(),
Value = ProvisioningRole.User
}
}
}
},
};
In and Out being extension methods I wrote:
public static class WorkflowExtensions
{
#region In
public static InArgument<T> In<T>(this InArgument<T> self)
{
return new InArgument<T>(context => self.Get(context));
}
public static InArgument<T> In<T>(this OutArgument<T> self)
{
return new InArgument<T>(context => self.Get(context));
}
#endregion
#region Out
public static OutArgument<T> Out<T>(this InArgument<T> self)
{
return new OutArgument<T>(context => self.Get(context));
}
public static OutArgument<T> Out<T>(this OutArgument<T> self)
{
return new OutArgument<T>(context => self.Get(context));
}
#endregion
}
And now all is well!
You should be able to get this to work. The basic approach should be to use a Variable to store data, use an OutArgument to get data out of activities into the Variable and InArguments to get data from a Variable into an activity.
Also note that the expressions to tie InArguments to Variables are VisualBasicValue expressions. So something like:
Condition = new VisualBasicValue("System.DateTime.Now.Hour < 12")
This blog post isn't about using arguments and variables but shows a couple of examples.
Going to shamelessly plug my own library that I ended up making for this:
http://code.google.com/p/system-transactions/
Allows basic compensation of code without the ginormous hassle of WF. Also, compiles properly and is easily debuggable.
This is all in C#, using .NET 2.0.
I have two lists of objects. They are not related objects, but they do have certain things in common that can be compared, such as a GUID-based unique identifier. These two lists need to be filtered by another list which just contains GUIDs which may or may not match up with the IDs contained in the first two lists.
I have thought about the idea of casting each object list to just object and sorting by that, but I'm not sure that I'll be able to access the ID property once it's cast, and I'm thinking that the method to sort the two lists should be somewhat dumb in knowing what the list to be sorted is.
What would be the best way to bring in each object list so that it can be sorted against the list with only the IDs?
You should make each of your different objects implement a common interface. Then create an IComparer<T> for that interface and use it in your sort.
Okay, if you have access to modify your original classes only to add the interface there, Matthew had it spot on. I went a little crazy here and defined out a full solution using 2.0 anonymous delegates. (I think I'm way addicted to 3.0 Lambda; otherwise, I probably would've written this out in foreach loops if I was using 2005 still).
Basically, create an interface with the common properties. Make yoru two classes implement the interface. Create a common list casted as the interface, cast and rip the values into the new list; remove any unmatched items.
//Program Output:
List1:
206aa77c-8259-428b-a4a0-0e005d8b016c
64f71cc9-596d-4cb8-9eb3-35da3b96f583
List2:
10382452-a7fe-4307-ae4c-41580dc69146
97f3f3f6-6e64-4109-9737-cb72280bc112
64f71cc9-596d-4cb8-9eb3-35da3b96f583
Matches:
64f71cc9-596d-4cb8-9eb3-35da3b96f583
Press any key to continue . . .
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Text;
namespace ConsoleApplication8
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
//test initialization
List<ClassTypeA> list1 = new List<ClassTypeA>();
List<ClassTypeB> list2 = new List<ClassTypeB>();
ClassTypeA citem = new ClassTypeA();
ClassTypeB citem2 = new ClassTypeB();
citem2.ID = citem.ID;
list1.Add(new ClassTypeA());
list1.Add(citem);
list2.Add(new ClassTypeB());
list2.Add(new ClassTypeB());
list2.Add(citem2);
//new common list.
List<ICommonTypeMakeUpYourOwnName> common_list =
new List<ICommonTypeMakeUpYourOwnName>();
//in english, give me everything in list 1
//and cast it to the interface
common_list.AddRange(
list1.ConvertAll<ICommonTypeMakeUpYourOwnName>(delegate(
ClassTypeA x) { return (ICommonTypeMakeUpYourOwnName)x; }));
//in english, give me all the items in the
//common list that don't exist in list2 and remove them.
common_list.RemoveAll(delegate(ICommonTypeMakeUpYourOwnName x)
{ return list2.Find(delegate(ClassTypeB y)
{return y.ID == x.ID;}) == null; });
//show list1
Console.WriteLine("List1:");
foreach (ClassTypeA item in list1)
{
Console.WriteLine(item.ID);
}
//show list2
Console.WriteLine("\nList2:");
foreach (ClassTypeB item in list2)
{
Console.WriteLine(item.ID);
}
//show the common items
Console.WriteLine("\nMatches:");
foreach (ICommonTypeMakeUpYourOwnName item in common_list)
{
Console.WriteLine(item.ID);
}
}
}
interface ICommonTypeMakeUpYourOwnName
{
Guid ID { get; set; }
}
class ClassTypeA : ICommonTypeMakeUpYourOwnName
{
Guid _ID;
public Guid ID {get { return _ID; } set { _ID = value;}}
int _Stuff1;
public int Stuff1 {get { return _Stuff1; } set { _Stuff1 = value;}}
string _Stuff2;
public string Stuff2 {get { return _Stuff2; } set { _Stuff2 = value;}}
public ClassTypeA()
{
this.ID = Guid.NewGuid();
}
}
class ClassTypeB : ICommonTypeMakeUpYourOwnName
{
Guid _ID;
public Guid ID {get { return _ID; } set { _ID = value;}}
int _Stuff3;
public int Stuff3 {get { return _Stuff3; } set { _Stuff3 = value;}}
string _Stuff4;
public string Stuff4 {get { return _Stuff4; } set { _Stuff4 = value;}}
public ClassTypeB()
{
this.ID = Guid.NewGuid();
}
}
}
Using only .NET 2.0 methods:
class Foo
{
public Guid Guid { get; }
}
List<Foo> GetFooSubset(List<Foo> foos, List<Guid> guids)
{
return foos.FindAll(foo => guids.Contains(foo.Guid));
}
If your classes don't implement a common interface, you'll have to implement GetFooSubset for each type individually.
I'm not sure that I fully understand what you want, but you can use linq to select out the matching items from the lists as well as sorting them. Here is a simple example where the values from one list are filtered on another and sorted.
List<int> itemList = new List<int>() { 9,6,3,4,5,2,7,8,1 };
List<int> filterList = new List<int>() { 2, 6, 9 };
IEnumerable<int> filtered = itemList.SelectMany(item => filterList.Where(filter => filter == item)).OrderBy(p => p);
I haven't had a chance to use AutoMapper yet, but from what you describe you wish to check it out. From Jimmy Bogard's post:
AutoMapper conventions
Since AutoMapper flattens, it will
look for:
Matching property names
Nested property names (Product.Name
maps to ProductName, by assuming a
PascalCase naming convention)
Methods starting with the word “Get”,
so GetTotal() maps to Total
Any existing type map already
configured
Basically, if you removed all the
“dots” and “Gets”, AutoMapper will
match property names. Right now,
AutoMapper does not fail on mismatched
types, but for some other reasons.
I am not totally sure what you want as your end results, however....
If you are comparing the properties on two different types you could project the property names and corresponding values into two dictionaries. And with that information do some sort of sorting/difference of the property values.
Guid newGuid = Guid.NewGuid();
var classA = new ClassA{Id = newGuid};
var classB = new ClassB{Id = newGuid};
PropertyInfo[] classAProperties = classA.GetType().GetProperties();
Dictionary<string, object> classAPropertyValue = classAProperties.ToDictionary(pName => pName.Name,
pValue =>
pValue.GetValue(classA, null));
PropertyInfo[] classBProperties = classB.GetType().GetProperties();
Dictionary<string, object> classBPropetyValue = classBProperties.ToDictionary(pName => pName.Name,
pValue =>
pValue.GetValue(classB, null));
internal class ClassB
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
}
internal class ClassA
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
}
classAPropertyValue
Count = 1
[0]: {[Id, d0093d33-a59b-4537-bde9-67db324cf7f6]}
classBPropetyValue
Count = 1
[0]: {[Id, d0093d33-a59b-4537-bde9-67db324cf7f6]}
Thist should essentially get you what you want - but you may be better of using linq
class T1
{
public T1(Guid g, string n) { Guid = g; MyName = n; }
public Guid Guid { get; set; }
public string MyName { get; set; }
}
class T2
{
public T2(Guid g, string n) { ID = g; Name = n; }
public Guid ID { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
class Test
{
public void Run()
{
Guid G1 = Guid.NewGuid();
Guid G2 = Guid.NewGuid();
Guid G3 = Guid.NewGuid();
List<T1> t1s = new List<T1>() {
new T1(G1, "one"),
new T1(G2, "two"),
new T1(G3, "three")
};
List<Guid> filter = new List<Guid>() { G2, G3};
List<T1> filteredValues1 = t1s.FindAll(delegate(T1 item)
{
return filter.Contains(item.Guid);
});
List<T1> filteredValues2 = t1s.FindAll(o1 => filter.Contains(o1.Guid));
}
}