Why doesn't Dictionary<TKey, TValue> support null key? [duplicate] - c#

This question already has answers here:
Why can't you use null as a key for a Dictionary<bool?, string>?
(11 answers)
Need an IDictionary<TKey,TValue> implementation that will allow a null key
(8 answers)
Closed last year.
Firstly, why doesn't Dictionary<TKey, TValue> support a single null key?
Secondly, is there an existing dictionary-like collection that does?
I want to store an "empty" or "missing" or "default" System.Type, thought null would work well for this.
More specifically, I've written this class:
class Switch
{
private Dictionary<Type, Action<object>> _dict;
public Switch(params KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>[] cases)
{
_dict = new Dictionary<Type, Action<object>>(cases.Length);
foreach (var entry in cases)
_dict.Add(entry.Key, entry.Value);
}
public void Execute(object obj)
{
var type = obj.GetType();
if (_dict.ContainsKey(type))
_dict[type](obj);
}
public static void Execute(object obj, params KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>[] cases)
{
var type = obj.GetType();
foreach (var entry in cases)
{
if (entry.Key == null || type.IsAssignableFrom(entry.Key))
{
entry.Value(obj);
break;
}
}
}
public static KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>> Case<T>(Action action)
{
return new KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>(typeof(T), x => action());
}
public static KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>> Case<T>(Action<T> action)
{
return new KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>(typeof(T), x => action((T)x));
}
public static KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>> Default(Action action)
{
return new KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>(null, x => action());
}
}
For switching on types. There are two ways to use it:
Statically. Just call Switch.Execute(yourObject, Switch.Case<YourType>(x => x.Action()))
Precompiled. Create a switch, and then use it later with switchInstance.Execute(yourObject)
Works great except when you try to add a default case to the "precompiled" version (null argument exception).

Why:
As described before, the problem is that Dictionary requires an implementation of the Object.GetHashCode() method. null does not have an implementation, therefore no hash code associated.
Solution: I have used a solution similar to a NullObject pattern using generics that enables you to use the dictionary seamlessly (no need for a different dictionary implementation).
You can use it like this:
var dict = new Dictionary<NullObject<Type>, string>();
dict[typeof(int)] = "int type";
dict[typeof(string)] = "string type";
dict[null] = "null type";
Assert.AreEqual("int type", dict[typeof(int)]);
Assert.AreEqual("string type", dict[typeof(string)]);
Assert.AreEqual("null type", dict[null]);
You just need to create this struct once in a lifetime :
public struct NullObject<T>
{
[DefaultValue(true)]
private bool isnull;// default property initializers are not supported for structs
private NullObject(T item, bool isnull) : this()
{
this.isnull = isnull;
this.Item = item;
}
public NullObject(T item) : this(item, item == null)
{
}
public static NullObject<T> Null()
{
return new NullObject<T>();
}
public T Item { get; private set; }
public bool IsNull()
{
return this.isnull;
}
public static implicit operator T(NullObject<T> nullObject)
{
return nullObject.Item;
}
public static implicit operator NullObject<T>(T item)
{
return new NullObject<T>(item);
}
public override string ToString()
{
return (Item != null) ? Item.ToString() : "NULL";
}
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
if (obj == null)
return this.IsNull();
if (!(obj is NullObject<T>))
return false;
var no = (NullObject<T>)obj;
if (this.IsNull())
return no.IsNull();
if (no.IsNull())
return false;
return this.Item.Equals(no.Item);
}
public override int GetHashCode()
{
if (this.isnull)
return 0;
var result = Item.GetHashCode();
if (result >= 0)
result++;
return result;
}
}

It doesn't support it because the dictionary hashes the key to determine the index, which it can't do on a null value.
A quick fix would be to create a dummy class, and insert the key value ?? dummyClassInstance.
Would need more information about what you're actually trying to do to give a less 'hacky' fix

It just hit me that your best answer is probably to just keep track of whether a default case has been defined:
class Switch
{
private Dictionary<Type, Action<object>> _dict;
private Action<object> defaultCase;
public Switch(params KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>[] cases)
{
_dict = new Dictionary<Type, Action<object>>(cases.Length);
foreach (var entry in cases)
if (entry.Key == null)
defaultCase = entry.Value;
else
_dict.Add(entry.Key, entry.Value);
}
public void Execute(object obj)
{
var type = obj.GetType();
if (_dict.ContainsKey(type))
_dict[type](obj);
else if (defaultCase != null)
defaultCase(obj);
}
...
The whole rest of your class would remain untouched.

NameValueCollection could take null key.

If you really want a dictionary that allows null keys, here's my quick implementation (not well-written or well-tested):
class NullableDict<K, V> : IDictionary<K, V>
{
Dictionary<K, V> dict = new Dictionary<K, V>();
V nullValue = default(V);
bool hasNull = false;
public NullableDict()
{
}
public void Add(K key, V value)
{
if (key == null)
if (hasNull)
throw new ArgumentException("Duplicate key");
else
{
nullValue = value;
hasNull = true;
}
else
dict.Add(key, value);
}
public bool ContainsKey(K key)
{
if (key == null)
return hasNull;
return dict.ContainsKey(key);
}
public ICollection<K> Keys
{
get
{
if (!hasNull)
return dict.Keys;
List<K> keys = dict.Keys.ToList();
keys.Add(default(K));
return new ReadOnlyCollection<K>(keys);
}
}
public bool Remove(K key)
{
if (key != null)
return dict.Remove(key);
bool oldHasNull = hasNull;
hasNull = false;
return oldHasNull;
}
public bool TryGetValue(K key, out V value)
{
if (key != null)
return dict.TryGetValue(key, out value);
value = hasNull ? nullValue : default(V);
return hasNull;
}
public ICollection<V> Values
{
get
{
if (!hasNull)
return dict.Values;
List<V> values = dict.Values.ToList();
values.Add(nullValue);
return new ReadOnlyCollection<V>(values);
}
}
public V this[K key]
{
get
{
if (key == null)
if (hasNull)
return nullValue;
else
throw new KeyNotFoundException();
else
return dict[key];
}
set
{
if (key == null)
{
nullValue = value;
hasNull = true;
}
else
dict[key] = value;
}
}
public void Add(KeyValuePair<K, V> item)
{
Add(item.Key, item.Value);
}
public void Clear()
{
hasNull = false;
dict.Clear();
}
public bool Contains(KeyValuePair<K, V> item)
{
if (item.Key != null)
return ((ICollection<KeyValuePair<K, V>>)dict).Contains(item);
if (hasNull)
return EqualityComparer<V>.Default.Equals(nullValue, item.Value);
return false;
}
public void CopyTo(KeyValuePair<K, V>[] array, int arrayIndex)
{
((ICollection<KeyValuePair<K, V>>)dict).CopyTo(array, arrayIndex);
if (hasNull)
array[arrayIndex + dict.Count] = new KeyValuePair<K, V>(default(K), nullValue);
}
public int Count
{
get { return dict.Count + (hasNull ? 1 : 0); }
}
public bool IsReadOnly
{
get { return false; }
}
public bool Remove(KeyValuePair<K, V> item)
{
V value;
if (TryGetValue(item.Key, out value) && EqualityComparer<V>.Default.Equals(item.Value, value))
return Remove(item.Key);
return false;
}
public IEnumerator<KeyValuePair<K, V>> GetEnumerator()
{
if (!hasNull)
return dict.GetEnumerator();
else
return GetEnumeratorWithNull();
}
private IEnumerator<KeyValuePair<K, V>> GetEnumeratorWithNull()
{
yield return new KeyValuePair<K, V>(default(K), nullValue);
foreach (var kv in dict)
yield return kv;
}
System.Collections.IEnumerator System.Collections.IEnumerable.GetEnumerator()
{
return GetEnumerator();
}
}

NHibernate comes with a NullableDictionary. That did it for me.
https://github.com/nhibernate/nhibernate-core/blob/master/src/NHibernate/Util/NullableDictionary.cs

Dictionary will hash the key supplie to get the index , in case of null , hash function can not return a valid value that's why it does not support null in key.

In your case you are trying to use null as a sentinel value (a "default") instead of actually needing to store null as a value. Rather than go to the hassle of creating a dictionary that can accept null keys, why not just create your own sentinel value. This is a variation on the "null object pattern":
class Switch
{
private class DefaultClass { }
....
public void Execute(object obj)
{
var type = obj.GetType();
Action<object> value;
// first look for actual type
if (_dict.TryGetValue(type, out value) ||
// look for default
_dict.TryGetValue(typeof(DefaultClass), out value))
value(obj);
}
public static void Execute(object obj, params KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>[] cases)
{
var type = obj.GetType();
foreach (var entry in cases)
{
if (entry.Key == typeof(DefaultClass) || type.IsAssignableFrom(entry.Key))
{
entry.Value(obj);
break;
}
}
}
...
public static KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>> Default(Action action)
{
return new KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>(new DefaultClass(), x => action());
}
}
Note that your first Execute function differs significantly from your second. It may be the case that you want something like this:
public void Execute(object obj)
{
Execute(obj, (IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>>)_dict);
}
public static void Execute(object obj, params KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>[] cases)
{
Execute(obj, (IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>>)cases);
}
public static void Execute(object obj, IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<Type, Action<object>>> cases)
{
var type = obj.GetType();
Action<object> defaultEntry = null;
foreach (var entry in cases)
{
if (entry.Key == typeof(DefaultClass))
defaultEntry = entry.Value;
if (type.IsAssignableFrom(entry.Key))
{
entry.Value(obj);
return;
}
}
if (defaultEntry != null)
defaultEntry(obj);
}

I come across this thread some days ago and needed a well thought out and clever solution to handle null keys. I took the time and implemented one by me to handle more scenarios.
You can find my implementation of NullableKeyDictionary currently in my pre-release package Teronis.NetStandard.Collections (0.1.7-alpha.37).
Implementation
public class NullableKeyDictionary<KeyType, ValueType> : INullableKeyDictionary<KeyType, ValueType>, IReadOnlyNullableKeyDictionary<KeyType, ValueType>, IReadOnlyCollection<KeyValuePair<INullableKey<KeyType>, ValueType>> where KeyType : notnull
public interface INullableKeyDictionary<KeyType, ValueType> : IDictionary<KeyType, ValueType>, IDictionary<NullableKey<KeyType>, ValueType> where KeyType : notnull
public interface IReadOnlyNullableKeyDictionary<KeyType, ValueType> : IReadOnlyDictionary<KeyType, ValueType>, IReadOnlyDictionary<NullableKey<KeyType>, ValueType> where KeyType : notnull
Usage (Excerpt of the Xunit test)
// Assign.
var dictionary = new NullableKeyDictionary<string, string>();
IDictionary<string, string> nonNullableDictionary = dictionary;
INullableKeyDictionary<string, string> nullableDictionary = dictionary;
// Assert.
dictionary.Add("value");
/// Assert.Empty does cast to IEnumerable, but our implementation of IEnumerable
/// returns an enumerator of type <see cref="KeyValuePair{NullableKey, TValue}"/>.
/// So we test on correct enumerator implementation wether it can move or not.
Assert.False(nonNullableDictionary.GetEnumerator().MoveNext());
Assert.NotEmpty(nullableDictionary);
Assert.Throws<ArgumentException>(() => dictionary.Add("value"));
Assert.True(dictionary.Remove());
Assert.Empty(nullableDictionary);
dictionary.Add("key", "value");
Assert.True(nonNullableDictionary.GetEnumerator().MoveNext());
Assert.NotEmpty(nullableDictionary);
Assert.Throws<ArgumentException>(() => dictionary.Add("key", "value"));
dictionary.Add("value");
Assert.Equal(1, nonNullableDictionary.Count);
Assert.Equal(2, nullableDictionary.Count);
The following overloads exists for Add(..):
void Add([AllowNull] KeyType key, ValueType value)
void Add(NullableKey<KeyType> key, [AllowNull] ValueType value)
void Add([AllowNull] ValueType value); // Shortcut for adding value with null key.
This class should behave same and intuitive as the dictionary does.
For Remove(..) keys you can use the following overloads:
void Remove([AllowNull] KeyType key)
void Remove(NullableKey<KeyType> key)
void Remove(); // Shortcut for removing value with null key.
The indexers do accept [AllowNull] KeyType or NullableKey<KeyType>. So supported scenarios, like they are stated in other posts, are supported:
var dict = new NullableKeyDictionary<Type, string>
dict[typeof(int)] = "int type";
dict[typeof(string)] = "string type";
dict[null] = "null type";
// Or:
dict[NullableKey<Type>.Null] = "null type";
I highly appreciate feedback and suggestions for improvements. :)

EDIT: Real answer to the question actually being asked: Why can't you use null as a key for a Dictionary<bool?, string>?
The reason the generic dictionary doesn't support null is because TKey might be a value type, which doesn't have null.
new Dictionary<int, string>[null] = "Null"; //error!
To get one that does, you could either use the non-generic Hashtable (which uses object keys and values), or roll your own with DictionaryBase.
Edit: just to clarify why null is illegal in this case, consider this generic method:
bool IsNull<T> (T value) {
return value == null;
}
But what happens when you call IsNull<int>(null)?
Argument '1': cannot convert from '<null>' to 'int'
You get a compiler error, since you can't convert null to an int. We can fix it, by saying that we only want nullable types:
bool IsNull<T> (T value) where T : class {
return value == null;
}
And, that's A-Okay. The restriction is that we can no longer call IsNull<int>, since int is not a class (nullable object)

Related

Enumerate keys and values of IDictionary when I don't know type of values

I have a reference to an object. I know it conforms to
IDictionary<string, T>
for some type T. (It may not conform to plain IDictionary, or to IReadyOnlyDictionary). All I know about T is that it descends from object. How can I get its keys, and get the value for a key? (I am fine with having the value be returned as an object, not as a T. I am also fine with never learning what T is.)
What I want to write, but can't, is something like this:
public void SomeMethod(object reallyADict) { // reallyADict implements IDictionary<string, T>.
foreach (string key in reallyADict.Keys) {
object value = reallyADict[key];
// . . .
}
}
**
Per request, a sample class is below.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Collections;
namespace My.Collections
{
public class WrappedDictionary: IDictionary<string, int>
{
public WrappedDictionary() {
this.InnerDictionary = new Dictionary<string, int>{ {"one", 1}, {"two", 2 }};
}
private Dictionary<string, int> InnerDictionary { get; set;}
private ICollection<KeyValuePair<string, int>> InnerCollection {
get {
return this.InnerDictionary;
}
}
#region IDictionary implementation
void IDictionary<string, int>.Add(string key, int value) {
this.InnerDictionary.Add(key, value);
}
bool IDictionary<string, int>.ContainsKey(string key) {
return this.InnerDictionary.ContainsKey(key);
}
bool IDictionary<string, int>.Remove(string key) {
return this.InnerDictionary.Remove(key);
}
bool IDictionary<string, int>.TryGetValue(string key, out int value) {
return this.InnerDictionary.TryGetValue(key, out value);
}
int IDictionary<string, int>.this[string index] {
get {
return this.InnerDictionary[index];
}
set {
this.InnerDictionary[index] = value;
}
}
ICollection<string> IDictionary<string, int>.Keys {
get {
return this.InnerDictionary.Keys;
}
}
ICollection<int> IDictionary<string, int>.Values {
get {
return this.InnerDictionary.Values;
}
}
#endregion
#region ICollection implementation
void ICollection<KeyValuePair<string, int>>.Add(KeyValuePair<string, int> item) {
this.InnerCollection.Add(item);
}
void ICollection<KeyValuePair<string, int>>.Clear() {
this.InnerDictionary.Clear();
}
bool ICollection<KeyValuePair<string, int>>.Contains(KeyValuePair<string, int> item) {
return this.InnerCollection.Contains(item);
}
void ICollection<KeyValuePair<string, int>>.CopyTo(KeyValuePair<string, int>[] array, int arrayIndex) {
this.InnerCollection.CopyTo(array, arrayIndex);
}
bool ICollection<KeyValuePair<string, int>>.Remove(KeyValuePair<string, int> item) {
return this.InnerCollection.Remove(item);
}
int ICollection<KeyValuePair<string, int>>.Count {
get {
return this.InnerCollection.Count;
}
}
bool ICollection<KeyValuePair<string, int>>.IsReadOnly {
get {
return this.InnerCollection.IsReadOnly;
}
}
#endregion
#region IEnumerable implementation
IEnumerator<KeyValuePair<string, int>> IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string, int>>.GetEnumerator() {
return this.InnerCollection.GetEnumerator();
}
#endregion
#region IEnumerable implementation
System.Collections.IEnumerator System.Collections.IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() {
return (this as IEnumerable).GetEnumerator();
}
#endregion
}
}
Unfortunatly you cannot cast the reallyADict to something like Dictionary<string,T>, because you need a specific type.
And Manfred's comment to use a generic method like
public IEnumerable<T> SomeMethod<T>(Dictionary<string, T> dict)
would be my approach, too. But you stated you really only have the dictionary as object.
So I solved this with Reflection:
public IEnumerable<object> SomeMethod(object reallyADict)
{
Type genericInterface = reallyADict?.GetType().GetInterface("IDictionary`2");
PropertyInfo propKeys = genericInterface?.GetProperty("Keys");
if (propKeys?.GetMethod == null) yield break;
IEnumerable<string> keys = (IEnumerable<string>)propKeys.GetValue(reallyADict);
PropertyInfo propIndex = genericInterface.GetProperty("Item");
if (propIndex?.GetMethod == null) yield break;
foreach (string key in keys)
yield return propIndex.GetMethod.Invoke(reallyADict, new object[] { key });
}
This method gets the Keys property from the reallyDict (if there is one) and uses it as an IEnumerable<string>.
Then it iterates over all those keys and uses the indexer property of the underlying dictionary to return the value. The indexer property has the name Item.

.NET dictionary with two keys and one value

Is there a dictionary available in .NET that could hold 2 keys and one value.
Like
Dictionary(Of TKey, Of TKey, TValue)
I have a need to store two keys and at certain times look an item by the key 1 and at other times by the key 2.
My current solution is to maintain two dictionaries
Dictionary<string, long> Dict1 = new Dictionary<string, long>();
Dictionary<long, long> Dict2 = new Dictionary<long, long>();
and when need to add item I will add it to both dictionaries.
Dict1.Add("abc", 111);
Dict2.Add(345, 111);
and then I will look up an item from either one of those dictionaries depending by which one of the keys I need to look by.
Same I will do when deleting or updating an item.
I have thought about the composite key but I don't know how to set it up and I don't want to lose any speed of searching the item.
Is there some solution available in .NET to have dictionary that can hold multiple keys?
As you wish your value to be “findable” from either key, I would just use two dictionaries like you are doing now. However I would wrap this up in a class, with methods names like FindByXXX and FindByYYY.
The much harder question is how do you do a delete, as you need to know both keys at the time of the delete. Maybe your value stores both keys so you can pass the value into your delete method. Maybe you never need to remove items from the dictionaries. Or the code that needs to remove items knows both keys.
Hence there is no standard dictionary to do this, as the requirements are different between each user.
(Note you don’t want a dictionary with a composite key, as that would require you to know both keys whenever you wished to look up an item.)
Maybe, something like this:
public class TwoKeyDictionary<Tkey1, Tkey2, TValue>
{
private object m_data_lock = new object();
private Dictionary<Tkey1, Tkey2> m_dic1 = new Dictionary<Tkey1, Tkey2>();
private Dictionary<Tkey2, TValue> m_dic2 = new Dictionary<Tkey2, TValue>();
public void AddValue(Tkey1 key1, Tkey2 key2, TValue value)
{
lock(m_data_lock)
{
m_dic1[key1] = key2;
m_dic2[key2] = value;
}
}
public TValue getByKey1(Tkey1 key1)
{
lock(m_data_lock)
return m_dic2[m_dic1[key1]];
}
public TValue getByKey2(Tkey key2)
{
lock(m_data_lock)
return m_dic2[key2];
}
public void removeByKey1(Tkey1 key1)
{
lock(m_data_lock)
{
Tkey2 tmp_key2 = m_dic1[key1];
m_dic1.Remove(key1);
m_dic2.Remove(tmp_key2);
}
}
public void removeByKey2(Tkey2 key2)
{
lock(m_data_lock)
{
Tkey1 tmp_key1 = m_dic1.First((kvp) => kvp.Value.Equals(key2)).Key;
m_dic1.Remove(tmp_key1);
m_dic2.Remove(key2);
}
}
}
I can offer a second solution, but it seems more slow and ugly vs. the first.
public class TwoKeysDictionary<K1, K2, V>
{
private class TwoKeysValue<K1, K2, V>
{
public K1 Key1 { get; set; }
public K2 Key2 { get; set; }
public V Value { get; set; }
}
private List<TwoKeysValue<K1, K2, V>> m_list = new List<TwoKeysValue<K1, K2, V>>();
public void Add(K1 key1, K2 key2, V value)
{
lock (m_list)
m_list.Add(new TwoKeysValue<K1, K2, V>() { Key1 = key1, Key2 = key2, Value = value });
}
public V getByKey1(K1 key1)
{
lock (m_list)
return m_list.First((tkv) => tkv.Key1.Equals(key1)).Value;
}
public V getByKey2(K2 key2)
{
lock (m_list)
return m_list.First((tkv) => tkv.Key2.Equals(key2)).Value;
}
public void removeByKey1(K1 key1)
{
lock (m_list)
m_list.Remove(m_list.First((tkv) => tkv.Key1.Equals(key1)));
}
public void removeByKey2(K2 key2)
{
lock (m_list)
m_list.Remove(m_list.First((tkv) => tkv.Key2.Equals(key2)));
}
}
In very bad case, when Keys are a big structures (i.e. big value-types) and Keys are equals by size, and values are small value-types (for instance, a byte), with first solution you had: one set of Key1 , two sets of Key2, one set of values = 3 sets of big objects and 1 set of small values.
With second solution you had: one set of Key1 , one set of Key2, one set of values = 2 sets of big objects and small set with values.
I.e. with using of first solution you need by 50% (or by lower) more memory space vs. second, but a second solution is a very, very slow vs. first.
Your solution has a big impact on the memory footprint of your application. As the dictionary grows it will take at least double the amount memory (for value types) required to store the actual data.
You could probably approach this from a different angle. Have two dictionaries :
var lookupDictionary = new Dictionary<string, string>();
var valuesDictionary = new Dictionary<string, [YourValueType]>();
From here on in its pretty simple.
// Add a new entry into the values dictionary and give it a unique key
valuesDictionary.Add("FooBar", "FUBAR VALUE");
// Add any number of lookup keys with the same value key
lookupDictionary.Add("Foo", "FooBar");
lookupDictionary.Add("Bar", "FooBar");
lookupDictionary.Add("Rab", "FooBar");
lookupDictionary.Add("Oof", "FooBar");
When you need to find something from valuesDictionary you hit lookupDictionary first. This will give you the key of the value you are looking for in the valuesDictionary.
EDIT
I haven't addressed the deletion issue in my answer so here it goes :D
You would hit lookupDictionary to find the value key and then delete all entries from lookupDictionary that have that value.
Should be simple enough and safe since the valuesDictionary is guaranteed to have a unique key hence you will not accidentally delete a lookup key for some other value.
However, as Ian Ringrose pointed out in a comment, you are going to do a full scan on the lookupDictionary to delete. This may have an undesirable impact on performance in tight loops etc.
I can't really think of a good way to solve this issue at the moment. Perhaps someone else might have some ideas on how this could be improved.
I hope this helps.
You can't do it just with a single Dictionary without losing look up speed. The reason is that if you were to create a composite key there is no meaningful value you can return when you override GetHashCode. This means an equality comparison would need to be done against every key until a dictionary entry is found. You would also have a potential problem with a composite key in this case: because your Equals method would check whether one property or the other are equal, the following keys would essentially be duplicate keys { Id=1, Name="Bob" } { Id=1, Name="Anna" }, which doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling.
This leaves you with wrapping a dictionary, or pair of dictionaries with your own class.
interesting question, here's one solution.
You have to add an indexer for every key type you want to support though.
public class NewDic<T>
{
public void Add(string key1, long key2, T value)
{
mDic.Add(key1, value);
mDic.Add(key2, value);
}
public T this[string s]
{
get { return mDic[s]; }
}
public T this[long l]
{
get { return mDic[l]; }
}
Dictionary<object, T> mDic = new Dictionary<object, T>();
}
NewDic<long> dic = new NewDic<long>();
dic.Add("abc", 20, 10);
Console.WriteLine(dic["abc"]);
Console.WriteLine(dic[20]);
This is NOT a proper dictionary, but can be used for simple dictionary-like add remove functionalities.
This can be made generic as well, with proper implementation of IComparable in the keys types, and changing the dictionary code accordingly. (Note, default values of keys are not allowed to manage ambiguity!)
internal class KeyValueSet //this dictionary item is tailor made for this example
{
public string KeyStr { get; set; }
public int KeyInt { get; set; }
public int Value { get; set; }
public KeyValueSet() { }
public KeyValueSet(string keyStr, int keyInt, int value)
{
KeyStr = keyStr;
KeyInt = keyInt;
Value = value;
}
}
public class DoubleKeyDictionary
{
List<KeyValueSet> _list = new List<KeyValueSet>();
private void Add(KeyValueSet set)
{
if (set == null)
throw new InvalidOperationException("Cannot add null");
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(set.KeyStr) && set.KeyInt == 0)
throw new InvalidOperationException("Invalid key");
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(set.KeyStr) && _list.Any(l => l.KeyStr.Equals(set.KeyStr))
|| set.KeyInt != 0 && _list.Any(l => l.KeyInt == set.KeyInt))
throw new InvalidOperationException("Either of keys exists");
_list.Add(set);
}
public void Add(string keyStr, int keyInt, int value)
{
Add(new KeyValueSet { KeyInt = keyInt, KeyStr = keyStr, Value = value });
}
public void Add(string key, int value)
{
Add(new KeyValueSet { KeyInt = 0, KeyStr = key, Value = value });
}
public void Add(int key, int value)
{
Add(new KeyValueSet { KeyInt = key, KeyStr = string.Empty, Value = value });
}
public void Remove(int key)
{
if (key == 0)
throw new InvalidDataException("Key not found");
var val = _list.First(l => l.KeyInt == key);
_list.Remove(val);
}
public void Remove(string key)
{
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(key))
throw new InvalidDataException("Key not found");
var val = _list.First(l => l.KeyStr == key);
_list.Remove(val);
}
public void Remove(KeyValueSet item)
{
_list.Remove(item);
}
public int this[int index]
{
get
{
if (index != 0 && _list.Any(l => l.KeyInt == index))
return _list.First(l => l.KeyInt == index).Value;
throw new InvalidDataException("Key not found");
}
set
{
Add(index, value);
}
}
public int this[string key]
{
get
{
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(key) && _list.Any(l => l.KeyStr == key))
return _list.First(l => l.KeyStr == key).Value;
throw new InvalidDataException("Key not found");
}
set
{
Add(key, value);
}
}
}
Testing the DoubleKeyDictionary
var dict = new DoubleKeyDictionary();
dict.Add(123, 1);
dict.Add(234, 2);
dict.Add("k1", 3);
dict.Add("k2", 4);
dict[456] = 5;
dict["k3"] = 6;
dict.Add("k4", 567, 7);
dict.Remove(123);
Console.WriteLine(dict[234]); //2
Console.WriteLine(dict["k2"]); //4
Console.WriteLine(dict[456]); //5
Console.WriteLine(dict[567]); //7
Console.WriteLine(dict["k4"]); //7
Console.WriteLine(dict[123]); //exception
As a local solution I use the easy approach:
Imagine I have a collection of products identified by a string and a form with buttons for each one of the products.
When managing the state of the buttons I need to find buttons by string key.
When handling the clicks I need to find product IDs by button instance.
Instead of maintaining two separate dictionaries I do the following:
public class SPurchaseOption
{
public Button Button;
public string ProductID;
public string SomeOtherAssociatedData;
}
Dictionary<object, SPurchaseOption> purchaseOptions;
When the buttons are initialized I append two entries into the Dictionary i.e.
Key: ProductID, Value: "SPurchaseOption"
Key: Button, Value: "SPurchaseOption"
For a more general approach and if you need a commonly used component you will have to build a wrap around two dictionaries i.e:
public class DoubleKeyedDictionary<TKey1, TKey2, TValue>
{
class SItem
{
public TKey1 key1;
public TKey2 key2;
public TValue value;
}
Dictionary<TKey1, SItem> dic1;
Dictionary<TKey2, SItem> dic2;
}
this will give access to both the value and alternative key by any of the keys.
As suggested in a comment to your question you could simply use an Object key for your Dictionary:
Dictionary<Object, long> dict = new Dictionary<Object, long>();
dict.Add("abc", 111);
dict.Add(345, 111);
To get a cleaner solution you could wrap this dictionary in a custom class and create your version of Add method:
public void Add(ISet<Object> keys, T value){
foreach(Object k in keys)
{
_privateDict.Add(k, value);
}
}
How about a Dictionary<Tuple<string, long>, long>? Tuples are compared by value, so it should index uniquely in the expected manner. Plus, now you won't have to pack the long value in two places (and deal with the wonderful pain of synchronizing the values everywhere).
How about this approach? Basically, still use a dictionary-based strategy, but facade it through a class with overloaded indexer properties. So it looks like a dictionary, feels like a dictionary, but supports multiple keys (not like a dictionary, LOL).
public class MultiKeyDictionary<TFirstKey, TSecondKey, TValue>
{
private readonly Dictionary<TFirstKey, TValue> firstKeyDictionary =
new Dictionary<TFirstKey, TValue>();
private readonly Dictionary<TSecondKey, TFirstKey> secondKeyDictionary =
new Dictionary<TSecondKey, TFirstKey>();
public TValue this[TFirstKey idx]
{
get
{
return firstKeyDictionary[idx];
}
set
{
firstKeyDictionary[idx] = value;
}
}
public TValue this[TSecondKey idx]
{
get
{
var firstKey = secondKeyDictionary[idx];
return firstKeyDictionary[firstKey];
}
set
{
var firstKey = secondKeyDictionary[idx];
firstKeyDictionary[firstKey] = value;
}
}
public IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<TFirstKey, TValue>> GetKeyValuePairsOfFirstKey()
{
return firstKeyDictionary.ToList();
}
public IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<TSecondKey, TValue>> GetKeyValuePairsOfSecondKey()
{
var r = from s in secondKeyDictionary
join f in firstKeyDictionary on s.Value equals f.Key
select new KeyValuePair<TSecondKey, TValue>(s.Key, f.Value);
return r.ToList();
}
public void Add(TFirstKey firstKey, TSecondKey secondKey, TValue value)
{
firstKeyDictionary.Add(firstKey, value);
secondKeyDictionary.Add(secondKey, firstKey);
}
public bool Remove(TFirstKey firstKey)
{
if (!secondKeyDictionary.Any(f => f.Value.Equals(firstKey))) return false;
var secondKeyToDelete = secondKeyDictionary.First(f => f.Value.Equals(firstKey));
secondKeyDictionary.Remove(secondKeyToDelete.Key);
firstKeyDictionary.Remove(firstKey);
return true;
}
public bool Remove(TSecondKey secondKey)
{
if (!secondKeyDictionary.ContainsKey(secondKey)) return false;
var firstKey = secondKeyDictionary[secondKey];
secondKeyDictionary.Remove(secondKey);
firstKeyDictionary.Remove(firstKey);
return true;
}
}
Test the code...
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var dict = new MultiKeyDictionary<string, long, long>();
dict.Add("abc", 111, 1234);
dict.Add("def", 222, 7890);
dict.Add("hij", 333, 9090);
Console.WriteLine(dict["abc"]); // expect 1234
Console.WriteLine(dict["def"]); // expect 7890
Console.WriteLine(dict[333]); // expect 9090
Console.WriteLine();
Console.WriteLine("removing def");
dict.Remove("def");
Console.WriteLine();
Console.WriteLine("now we have:");
foreach (var d in dict.GetKeyValuePairsOfFirstKey())
{
Console.WriteLine($"{d.Key} : {d.Value}");
}
Console.WriteLine();
Console.WriteLine("removing 333");
dict.Remove(333);
Console.WriteLine();
Console.WriteLine("now we have:");
foreach (var d in dict.GetKeyValuePairsOfSecondKey())
{
Console.WriteLine($"{d.Key} : {d.Value}");
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
At first I thought I could create a class that implmented IDictionary<TKey1, TValue> and IDictionary<TKey2, TValue>, and just have a single Dictionary as a field and delegate most methods to the single dictionary with minimal logic.
The problem with this approach is that TKey1 and TKey2 could be of the same type, which is a problem because this new class would be implementing the same interface twice. Which method should the runtime invoke when TKey1 is a string and TKey2 is also a string?
As others above have suggested, it is best to create your own data structure that utilizes one or two dictionaries behind the scenes. For example, if you knew ahead of time that you wanted to use a string and an int as your keys, you could use this approach:
public class StringIntDictionary<TValue> : IDictionary<string, TValue>, IDictionary<int, TValue>
{
private IDictionary<object, TValue> _dictionary = new Dictionary<object, TValue>();
// implement interface below, delegate to _dictionary
}
That would allow you to look use both string and int keys:
var dict = StringIntDictionary<bool>();
dict["abc"] = true;
dict[123] = true;
A very crude way that may suffice until I find a better one.
class MyClass
{
public string StringKey = "";
public int IntKey = 0;
public override Equals(object obj)
{
// Code to return true if all fields are equal
}
}
Dictionary <MyClass, string> MyDict;
MyClass myClass;
MyDict[MyDict.Keys.FirstOrDefault(x => x.Equals(MyClass))];
For my money, the answer saying to use tuples is the right one. Unfortunately, my NuGet is too old to get the ValueTuple package I'd want to use so my fields aren't 'item1', 'item2' etc. That would be more confusing than what I've done here. When I change VS/NuGet versions, it's ValueTuples all the way for this kind of situation. Second time this week I've encountered the need!
Here's something better in terms of efficiency.
public class MultiKeyDictionary<TKeyType1, TKeyType2, TValueType>
{
private readonly object threadLock = new object();
private readonly Dictionary<TKeyType1, TValueType> _dictionary1 = new Dictionary<TKeyType1, TValueType>();
private readonly Dictionary<TKeyType2, TValueType> _dictionary2 = new Dictionary<TKeyType2, TValueType>();
private readonly Dictionary<TKeyType1, TKeyType2> _Key1Key2Map = new Dictionary<TKeyType1, TKeyType2>();
private readonly Dictionary<TKeyType2, TKeyType1> _Key2Key1Map = new Dictionary<TKeyType2, TKeyType1>();
public bool Add(TKeyType1 key1, TKeyType2 key2, TValueType v)
{
if (ContainsKey1(key1) || ContainsKey2(key2))
return false;
_dictionary1.Add(key1, v);
_dictionary2.Add(key2, v);
_Key1Key2Map.Add(key1, key2);
_Key2Key1Map.Add(key2, key1);
return true;
}
public bool ContainsKey1(TKeyType1 key)
{
return _dictionary1.ContainsKey(key);
}
public bool ContainsKey2(TKeyType2 key)
{
return _dictionary2.ContainsKey(key);
}
//Note if TKeyType1 and TKeyType2 are the same then we are forced to use GetBy functions
public TValueType GetByKey1(TKeyType1 key)
{
return _dictionary1[key];
}
public TValueType GetByKey2(TKeyType2 key)
{
return _dictionary2[key];
}
public bool SetByKey1(TKeyType1 key, TValueType val)
{
if (ContainsKey1(key))
return false;
lock (threadLock)
{
var key2 = _Key1Key2Map[key];
_dictionary1[key] = val;
_dictionary2[key2] = val;
}
return true;
}
public bool SetByKey2(TKeyType2 key, TValueType val)
{
if (ContainsKey2(key))
return false;
lock (threadLock)
{
var key1 = _Key2Key1Map[key];
_dictionary1[key1] = val;
_dictionary2[key] = val;
}
return true;
}
public void RemoveUsingKey1(TKeyType1 key)
{
lock (threadLock)
{
var key2 = _Key1Key2Map[key];
_dictionary1.Remove(key);
_dictionary2.Remove(key2);
_Key1Key2Map.Remove(key);
_Key2Key1Map.Remove(key2);
}
}
public void RemoveUsingKey2(TKeyType2 key)
{
lock (threadLock)
{
var key1 = _Key2Key1Map[key];
_dictionary1.Remove(key1);
_dictionary2.Remove(key);
_Key1Key2Map.Remove(key1);
_Key2Key1Map.Remove(key);
}
}
public bool Contains(TKeyType1 key)
{
return _dictionary1.ContainsKey(key);
}
public bool Contains(TKeyType2 key)
{
return _dictionary2.ContainsKey(key);
}
public TValueType this[TKeyType1 key]
{
get => GetByKey1(key);
set => SetByKey1(key, value);
}
public TValueType this[TKeyType2 key]
{
get => GetByKey2(key);
set => SetByKey2(key, value);
}
public void Remove(TKeyType1 key)
{
RemoveUsingKey1(key);
}
public void Remove(TKeyType2 key)
{
RemoveUsingKey2(key);
}
public int Count => _dictionary1.Count;
public Dictionary<TKeyType1, TValueType>.KeyCollection Key1s => _dictionary1.Keys;
public Dictionary<TKeyType2, TValueType>.KeyCollection Key2s => _dictionary2.Keys;
public Dictionary<TKeyType1, TValueType>.ValueCollection Values => _dictionary1.Values;
public void Clear()
{
lock (threadLock)
{
_dictionary1.Clear();
_dictionary2.Clear();
_Key1Key2Map.Clear();
_Key2Key1Map.Clear();
}
}
//Map between Keys
public TKeyType2 Key2(TKeyType1 key)
{
return _Key1Key2Map[key];
}
public TKeyType1 Key1(TKeyType2 key)
{
return _Key2Key1Map[key];
}
}
I have created my own version of it. It is a bit more sophisticated. The documentation should explain some of the functionality. In essence it allows a reasonable way to handle 2 keys for the same value, auto-merges entries, is presumably thread-safe (untested), allows mapping keys together, and handles deleting entries, all the while having the functionality of dictionaries at its base. When adding an entry, but one of its keys already exists, it will just add the key and overwrite the value. It's quite distinct logically from other forms of collections, so these are the most I was able to implement.
Some structure with key pairs didn't seem fitting, given that I need this to arbitrarily add a second key as needed to existing entries, and given the merging functionality. I also took regard for the situation where one uses the same types for both keys, but also for situations where they don't.
/// <summary> A collection that internally uses a list (which in turn internally uses an array), and two dictionaries for the index.
/// This allows operating it based on two keys and provides means to (automatically) map keys to each other.
/// The indexing of the internal list is treated specially. In order to not infringe on the validity of the dictionaries' references to the indexes,
/// they are kept identical. Removing is handled by setting the entries to 'null', and once a new item is added, they are overwritten. </summary>
/// <typeparam name="TKey1"> The first key. </typeparam>
/// <typeparam name="TKey2"> The second key. </typeparam>
/// <typeparam name="T"> The stored value type. </typeparam>
public class TwoKeyDictionary<TKey1, TKey2, T> : IEnumerable<TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T>>, IReadOnlyCollection<TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T>>
{
private readonly Dictionary<TKey1, int> _keys01 = new Dictionary<TKey1, int> ();
private readonly Dictionary<TKey2, int> _keys02 = new Dictionary<TKey2, int> ();
private readonly List<TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T>> _items = new List<TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T>> ();
private int _freeIndex = 0; // The index of the first free slot.
private int _freeCount = 0; // Free before the last value.
private readonly object _lock = new object ();
public TwoKeyDictionary () { }
/// <summary> Adds an item. </summary>
public bool Add (TKey1 key, T value)
{
return AddByKey1 (key, value);
}
/// <summary> Adds an item. </summary>
public bool Add (TKey2 key, T value)
{
return AddByKey2 (key, value);
}
/// <summary> Adds an item. </summary>
public bool AddByKey1 (TKey1 key, T value)
{
lock (_lock)
{
return AddByKey1Internal (key, value);
}
}
/// <summary> Adds an item. </summary>
public bool AddByKey2 (TKey2 key, T value)
{
lock (_lock)
{
return AddByKey2Internal (key, value);
}
}
/// <summary> Adds an item with two keys. If either key already exists, it will map the other key to it. The value will only be overwritten if it's 'null'. </summary>
public bool Add (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2, T value)
{
return Add (key1, key2, value, false);
}
/// <summary> Adds an item with two keys. If either key already exists, it will map the other key to it. The value will only be overwritten if it's 'null'.
/// This may also define how the key is mapped, if occurring. </summary>
public bool Add (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2, T value, bool mapToKey2)
{
lock (_lock)
{
return AddInternal (key1, key2, value, mapToKey2);
}
}
/// <summary> Maps both keys together. If either key exists, it will add the other one to it. If both exist, it will merge the entries and delete the other.
/// By default this will map to key1. </summary>
public bool Map (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2)
{
return MapToKey1 (key1, key2);
}
/// <summary> Maps both keys together. If either key exists, it will add the other one to it. If both exist, it will merge the entries and delete the one with key2. </summary>
public bool MapToKey1 (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2)
{
lock (_lock)
{
return MapToKey1Internal (key1, key2);
}
}
/// <summary> Maps both keys together. If either key exists, it will add the other one to it. If both exist, it will merge the entries and delete the one with key1. </summary>
public bool MapToKey2 (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2)
{
lock (_lock)
{
return MapToKey2Internal (key1, key2);
}
}
/// <summary> Removes an entry based on key1. If there is a key2 mapped to it, it will be removed as well. </summary>
public bool Remove (TKey1 key)
{
return RemoveByKey1 (key);
}
/// <summary> Removes an entry based on key2. If there is a key1 mapped to it, it will be removed as well. </summary>
public bool Remove (TKey2 key)
{
return RemoveByKey2 (key);
}
/// <summary> Removes an entry based on key1. If there is a key2 mapped to it, it will be removed as well. </summary>
public bool RemoveByKey1 (TKey1 key)
{
lock (_lock)
{
return RemoveByKey1Internal (key);
}
}
/// <summary> Removes an entry based on key2. If there is a key1 mapped to it, it will be removed as well. </summary>
public bool RemoveByKey2 (TKey2 key)
{
lock (_lock)
{
return RemoveByKey2Internal (key);
}
}
/// <summary> Removes an entry based on both, key1 and key2. Any entries related to either keys will be removed. </summary>
public bool Remove (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2)
{
lock (_lock)
{
return RemoveByKey1Internal (key1) | RemoveByKey2Internal (key2);
}
}
/// <summary> Tries to return a value based on key1. </summary>
public bool TryGetValue (TKey1 key, out T value)
{
return TryGetValueByKey1 (key, out value);
}
/// <summary> Tries to return a value based on key2. </summary>
public bool TryGetValue (TKey2 key, out T value)
{
return TryGetValueByKey2 (key, out value);
}
/// <summary> Tries to return a value based on key1. </summary>
public bool TryGetValueByKey1 (TKey1 key, out T value)
{
if (key == null) { value = default; return false; }
if (_keys01.TryGetValue (key, out int index))
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> entry = _items[index];
if (entry != null)
{
value = entry.Value;
return true;
}
}
value = default;
return false;
}
/// <summary> Tries to return a value based on key2. </summary>
public bool TryGetValueByKey2 (TKey2 key, out T value)
{
if (key == null) { value = default; return false; }
if (_keys02.TryGetValue (key, out int index))
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> entry = _items[index];
if (entry != null)
{
value = entry.Value;
return true;
}
}
value = default;
return false;
}
/// <summary> Tries to return a value based on key1 or key2. Prioritizes key1. </summary>
public bool TryGetValue (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2, out T value)
{
return TryGetValue (key1, key2, false, out value);
}
/// <summary> Tries to return a value based on key1 or key2. </summary>
public bool TryGetValue (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2, bool prioritizeKey2, out T value)
{
return prioritizeKey2 ? TryGetValue (key1, out value) || TryGetValue (key2, out value) : TryGetValue (key2, out value) || TryGetValue (key1, out value);
}
/// <summary> Returns 'true' if they key and the entry still exists. The stored value itself may still be 'null' regardless. </summary>
public bool ContainsKey (TKey1 key)
{
return ContainsKey1 (key);
}
/// <summary> Returns 'true' if they key and the entry still exists. The stored value itself may still be 'null' regardless. </summary>
public bool ContainsKey (TKey2 key)
{
return ContainsKey2 (key);
}
/// <summary> Returns 'true' if they key and the entry still exists. The stored value itself may still be 'null' regardless. </summary>
public bool ContainsKey1 (TKey1 key)
{
if (key == null) return false;
if (_keys01.TryGetValue (key, out int index)) return _items[index] != null;
else return false;
}
/// <summary> Returns 'true' if they key and the entry still exists. The stored value itself may still be 'null' regardless. </summary>
public bool ContainsKey2 (TKey2 key)
{
if (key == null) return false;
if (_keys02.TryGetValue (key, out int index)) return _items[index] != null;
else return false;
}
/// <summary> Returns 'true' if they key and the entry still exists. The stored value itself may still be 'null' regardless. </summary>
public bool ContainsKey (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2)
{
return ContainsKey1 (key1) || ContainsKey2 (key2);
}
#region Internal
// Returns true if this wasn't the last position.
private bool GetFreeIndex (bool apply, out int index)
{
if (_freeCount == 0)
{
index = _items.Count;
return false;
}
else
{
index = _freeIndex;
if (apply)
{
// We must find the next free slot.
int freeIndex = _freeIndex + 1;
int count = _items.Count;
while (freeIndex < count && _items[freeIndex] != null)
{
freeIndex++;
}
if (freeIndex == count) _freeCount = 0;
else Interlocked.Decrement (ref _freeCount);
_freeIndex = freeIndex;
}
return true;
}
}
private bool MapToKey1Internal (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2)
{
if (key1 == null || key2 == null) return false;
bool s1 = _keys01.TryGetValue (key1, out int index1);
bool s2 = _keys02.TryGetValue (key2, out int index2);
if (s1 && s2)
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> e1 = _items[index1];
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> e2 = _items[index2];
RemoveByKey2Internal (key2);
e1.Key2 = key2;
if (e1.Value == null) e1.Value = e2.Value;
return true;
}
else if (s1)
{
_items[index1].Key2 = key2;
_keys02.Add (key2, index1);
return true;
}
else if (s2)
{
_items[index2].Key1 = key1;
_keys01.Add (key1, index2);
return true;
}
else return false;
}
private bool MapToKey2Internal (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2)
{
if (key1 == null || key2 == null) return false;
bool s1 = _keys01.TryGetValue (key1, out int index1);
bool s2 = _keys02.TryGetValue (key2, out int index2);
if (s1 && s2)
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> e1 = _items[index1];
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> e2 = _items[index2];
RemoveByKey1Internal (key1);
e2.Key1 = key1;
if (e2.Value == null) e2.Value = e1.Value;
return true;
}
else if (s1)
{
_items[index1].Key2 = key2;
return true;
}
else if (s2)
{
_items[index2].Key1 = key1;
return true;
}
else return false;
}
private bool AddByKey1Internal (TKey1 key, T value)
{
if (key == null) return false;
if (_keys01.TryGetValue (key, out int index))
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> entry = _items[index];
if (entry != null)
{
entry.Value = value;
return true;
}
else
{
_keys01.Remove (key);
return AddByKey1Internal (key, value);
}
}
else
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> item = new TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> (key, default, value);
if (GetFreeIndex (true, out int freeIndex))
{
_items[freeIndex] = item;
}
else
{
_items.Add (item);
}
_keys01.Add (key, freeIndex);
return true;
}
}
private bool AddByKey2Internal (TKey2 key, T value)
{
if (key == null) return false;
if (_keys02.TryGetValue (key, out int index))
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> entry = _items[index];
if (entry != null)
{
entry.Value = value;
return true;
}
else
{
_keys02.Remove (key);
return AddByKey2Internal (key, value);
}
}
else
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> item = new TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> (default, key, value);
if (GetFreeIndex (true, out int freeIndex))
{
_items[freeIndex] = item;
}
else
{
_items.Add (item);
}
_keys02.Add (key, freeIndex);
return true;
}
}
private bool AddInternal (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2, T value, bool mapToKey2)
{
if (key1 == null) return AddByKey2Internal (key2, value);
else if (key2 == null) return AddByKey1Internal (key1, value);
bool hasKey1 = _keys01.TryGetValue (key1, out int index1);
bool hasKey2 = _keys02.TryGetValue (key2, out int index2);
if (hasKey1 && hasKey2)
{
// We have 2 different entries' keys that point to the same value. Merge them to one key, remove the other.
if (mapToKey2)
{
if (MapToKey2Internal (key1, key2))
{
_items[index2].Value = value;
}
}
else
{
if (MapToKey1Internal (key1, key2))
{
_items[index1].Value = value;
}
}
}
else if (hasKey1)
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> entry = _items[index1];
entry.Key2 = key2;
entry.Value = value;
}
else if (hasKey2)
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> entry = _items[index2];
entry.Key1 = key1;
entry.Value = value;
}
else
{
_items.Add (new TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> (key1, key2, value));
}
return true;
}
private bool RemoveByKey1Internal (TKey1 key)
{
if (key == null) return false;
if (_keys01.TryGetValue (key, out int index))
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> entry = _items[index];
if (entry != null)
{
_keys01.Remove (key);
if (entry.Key2 != null) _keys02.Remove (entry.Key2);
if (index == _items.Count - 1)
{
_items.RemoveAt (index);
}
else
{
_items[index] = null;
_freeIndex = _freeCount > 0 ? Math.Min (_freeIndex, index) : index;
Interlocked.Increment (ref _freeCount);
}
return true;
}
else
{
_keys01.Remove (key);
}
}
return false;
}
private bool RemoveByKey2Internal (TKey2 key)
{
if (key == null) return false;
if (_keys02.TryGetValue (key, out int index))
{
TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T> entry = _items[index];
if (entry != null)
{
_keys02.Remove (key);
if (entry.Key1 != null) _keys01.Remove (entry.Key1);
if (index == _items.Count - 1)
{
_items.RemoveAt (index);
}
else
{
_items[index] = null;
_freeIndex = _freeCount > 0 ? Math.Min (_freeIndex, index) : index;
Interlocked.Increment (ref _freeCount);
}
return true;
}
else
{
_keys02.Remove (key);
}
}
return false;
}
#endregion
#region Interface Implementations
public int Count => _items.Count (j => j != null);
public IEnumerator<TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T>> GetEnumerator ()
{
return _items.Where (j => j != null).GetEnumerator ();
}
IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator ()
{
return _items.Where (j => j != null).GetEnumerator ();
}
#endregion
}
/// <summary> The entry class of <see cref="TwoKeyDictionary{TKey1, TKey2, T}"/>, which grants references to the keys in both dictionaries used. </summary>
/// <typeparam name="TKey1"> The first key. </typeparam>
/// <typeparam name="TKey2"> The second key. </typeparam>
/// <typeparam name="T"> The stored value type. </typeparam>
public class TwoKeyDictionaryEntry<TKey1, TKey2, T>
{
public TKey1 Key1 { get; internal set; }
public TKey2 Key2 { get; internal set; }
public T Value { get; internal set; }
internal TwoKeyDictionaryEntry () { }
internal TwoKeyDictionaryEntry (TKey1 key1, TKey2 key2, T value)
{
Key1 = key1;
Key2 = key2;
Value = value;
}
public override string ToString ()
{
return $"{Key1?.ToString () ?? "---"} | {Key2?.ToString () ?? "---"} | {Value}";
}
}

Using Attributes to simplify properties

I have a scenario where I need the properties in my class to map to a dictionary. Here is a code sample:
public string Foo
{
get
{
if (!PropertyBag.ContainsKey("Foo"))
{
return null;
}
return PropertyBag["Foo"];
}
set
{
PropertyBag["Foo"] = value;
}
}
I have to apply this pattern to multiple properties. Is there a way to use attributes to do that?
I know that PostSharp would work for this purpose, but I was hoping there is a way to do it without using it.
This feels like a code smell to me. It would be better to use regular POCOs and convert them to a Dictionary only when needed.
public class BlogPost
{
public string Title { get; set; }
public string Body { get; set; }
public int AuthorId { get; set; }
public Dictionary<string, object> ToDictionary()
{
return this.GetType()
.GetProperties(BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public)
.ToDictionary(prop => prop.Name, prop => prop.GetValue(this, null));
}
}
Inspiration: How to convert class into Dictionary?
And to be honest, a ToDictionary method on your POCO's seems like a code smell. It would be better to refactor your code so the conversion of POCOs to Dictionaries happens in its own layer, as a service maybe.
Edit: This Gist I found while searching google for "c# convert object to dictionary" could provide a more generalized solution, and probably more bullet proof than my cobbled together example:
Gist: https://gist.github.com/jarrettmeyer/798667
From the Gist:
public static class ObjectToDictionaryHelper
{
public static IDictionary<string, object> ToDictionary(this object source)
{
return source.ToDictionary<object>();
}
public static IDictionary<string, T> ToDictionary<T>(this object source)
{
if (source == null)
ThrowExceptionWhenSourceArgumentIsNull();
var dictionary = new Dictionary<string, T>();
foreach (PropertyDescriptor property in TypeDescriptor.GetProperties(source))
AddPropertyToDictionary<T>(property, source, dictionary);
return dictionary;
}
private static void AddPropertyToDictionary<T>(PropertyDescriptor property, object source, Dictionary<string, T> dictionary)
{
object value = property.GetValue(source);
if (IsOfType<T>(value))
dictionary.add(property.Name, (T)value);
}
private static bool IsOfType<T>(object value)
{
return value is T;
}
private static void ThrowExceptionWhenSourceArgumentIsNull()
{
throw new ArgumentNullException("source", "Unable to convert object to a dictionary. The source object is null.");
}
}
Credit: jerrettmeyer at GitHub
This should add a ToDictionary method to every object.
Edit: From the following comment
To give a bit of context, I am using Entity Framework and I have a class hierarchy that I would like to keep in one table while avoiding null columns everywhere.
Entity framework supports multiple table inheritance. That might be a better solution in your case.
You can write a GetValueOrDefault extension method and reduce the code a little.
public static class DictionaryExtensions
{
public static TValue GetValueOrDefault<TKey, TValue>(this IDictionary<TKey,TValue> self, TKey key)
{
TValue value;
self.TryGetValue(key,out value);
return value;
}
}
public string Foo
{
get
{
return PropertyBag.GetValueOrDefault("Foo");
}
set
{
PropertyBag["Foo"] = value;
}
}
You can eliminate the magic strings using expressions.
If you're using at least .NET 4.5 then you have the CallerMemberNameAttribute which you could use like this:
class SomeClass
{
public string Foo
{
get
{
return GetPropertyValue();
}
set
{
SetPropertyValue( value );
}
}
private string GetPropertyValue( [CallerMemberName] string name = null )
{
string value;
PropertyBag.TryGetValue( name, out value );
return value;
}
private void SetPropertyValue( string value, [CallerMemberName] string name = null )
{
PropertyBag[name] = value;
}
}
This will result in the compiler filling out the name of the member for you. If you're not (or otherwise can't) use .NET 4.5, another alternative would be to take advantage of expression trees as suggested in another answer.
class Test
{
Dictionary<string,object> _values = new Dictionary<string, object>();
public string Foo
{
get
{
var value = GetValue();
return value == null ? string.Empty : (string)value;
}
set
{
SetValue(value);
}
}
private object GetValue()
{
var stack = new StackTrace();
var key = GetGenericName(stack.GetFrame(1).GetMethod().Name);
if (_values.ContainsKey(key)) return _values[key];
return null;
}
private void SetValue(object value)
{
var stack = new StackTrace();
var key = GetGenericName(stack.GetFrame(1).GetMethod().Name);
_values[key] = value;
}
private string GetGenericName(string key)
{
return key.Split('_')[1];
}
}

how to convert NameValueCollection to JSON string?

I tried:
NameValueCollection Data = new NameValueCollection();
Data.Add("foo","baa");
string json = new JavaScriptSerializer().Serialize(Data);
it returns: ["foo"] I expected {"foo" : "baa"}
How do I to do this?
One way to serialize NameValueCollection is by first converting it to Dictionary and then serialize the Dictionary. To convert to dictionary:
thenvc.AllKeys.ToDictionary(k => k, k => thenvc[k]);
If you need to do the conversion frequently, you can also create an extension method to NameValueCollection:
public static class NVCExtender
{
public static IDictionary<string, string> ToDictionary(
this NameValueCollection source)
{
return source.AllKeys.ToDictionary(k => k, k => source[k]);
}
}
so you can do the conversion in one line like this:
NameValueCollection Data = new NameValueCollection();
Data.Add("Foo", "baa");
var dict = Data.ToDictionary();
Then you can serialize the dictionary:
var json = new JavaScriptSerializer().Serialize(dict);
// you get {"Foo":"baa"}
But NameValueCollection can have multiple values for one key, for example:
NameValueCollection Data = new NameValueCollection();
Data.Add("Foo", "baa");
Data.Add("Foo", "again?");
If you serialize this you will get {"Foo":"baa,again?"}.
You can modify the converter to produce IDictionary<string, string[]> instead:
public static IDictionary<string, string[]> ToDictionary(
this NameValueCollection source)
{
return source.AllKeys.ToDictionary(k => k, k => source.GetValues(k));
}
So you can get serialized value like this: {"Foo":["baa","again?"]}.
NameValueCollection isn't an IDictionary, so the JavaScriptSerializer cannot serialize it as you expect directly. You'll need to first convert it into a dictionary, then serialize it.
Update: following questions regarding multiple values per key, the call to nvc[key] will simply return them separated by a comma, which may be ok. If not, one can always call GetValues and decide what to do with the values appropriately. Updated the code below to show one possible way.
public class StackOverflow_7003740
{
static Dictionary<string, object> NvcToDictionary(NameValueCollection nvc, bool handleMultipleValuesPerKey)
{
var result = new Dictionary<string, object>();
foreach (string key in nvc.Keys)
{
if (handleMultipleValuesPerKey)
{
string[] values = nvc.GetValues(key);
if (values.Length == 1)
{
result.Add(key, values[0]);
}
else
{
result.Add(key, values);
}
}
else
{
result.Add(key, nvc[key]);
}
}
return result;
}
public static void Test()
{
NameValueCollection nvc = new NameValueCollection();
nvc.Add("foo", "bar");
nvc.Add("multiple", "first");
nvc.Add("multiple", "second");
foreach (var handleMultipleValuesPerKey in new bool[] { false, true })
{
if (handleMultipleValuesPerKey)
{
Console.WriteLine("Using special handling for multiple values per key");
}
var dict = NvcToDictionary(nvc, handleMultipleValuesPerKey);
string json = new JavaScriptSerializer().Serialize(dict);
Console.WriteLine(json);
Console.WriteLine();
}
}
}
If your dictionary is not intended to contain many entries, you can use the class:
System.Collections.Specialized.ListDictionary
For completeness' sake, and because the question continues to get asked (e.g. here), as long as you are using Json.NET or DataContractJsonSerializer (but not JavaScriptSerializer), you could use the adapter pattern and wrap the NameValueCollection in an IDictionary<string, string[]> adapter, and serialize that using any serializer that fully supports serializing arbitrary dictionaries.
Once such adapter is as follows:
public class NameValueCollectionDictionaryAdapter<TNameValueCollection> : IDictionary<string, string[]>
where TNameValueCollection : NameValueCollection, new()
{
readonly TNameValueCollection collection;
public NameValueCollectionDictionaryAdapter() : this(new TNameValueCollection()) { }
public NameValueCollectionDictionaryAdapter(TNameValueCollection collection)
{
this.collection = collection;
}
// Method instead of a property to guarantee that nobody tries to serialize it.
public TNameValueCollection GetCollection() { return collection; }
#region IDictionary<string,string[]> Members
public void Add(string key, string[] value)
{
if (collection.GetValues(key) != null)
throw new ArgumentException("Duplicate key " + key);
if (value == null)
collection.Add(key, null);
else
foreach (var str in value)
collection.Add(key, str);
}
public bool ContainsKey(string key) { return collection.GetValues(key) != null; }
public ICollection<string> Keys { get { return collection.AllKeys; } }
public bool Remove(string key)
{
bool found = ContainsKey(key);
if (found)
collection.Remove(key);
return found;
}
public bool TryGetValue(string key, out string[] value)
{
return (value = collection.GetValues(key)) != null;
}
public ICollection<string[]> Values
{
get
{
return new ReadOnlyCollectionAdapter<KeyValuePair<string, string[]>, string[]>(this, p => p.Value);
}
}
public string[] this[string key]
{
get
{
var value = collection.GetValues(key);
if (value == null)
throw new KeyNotFoundException(key);
return value;
}
set
{
Remove(key);
Add(key, value);
}
}
#endregion
#region ICollection<KeyValuePair<string,string[]>> Members
public void Add(KeyValuePair<string, string[]> item) { Add(item.Key, item.Value); }
public void Clear() { collection.Clear(); }
public bool Contains(KeyValuePair<string, string[]> item)
{
string[] value;
if (!TryGetValue(item.Key, out value))
return false;
return EqualityComparer<string[]>.Default.Equals(item.Value, value); // Consistent with Dictionary<TKey, TValue>
}
public void CopyTo(KeyValuePair<string, string[]>[] array, int arrayIndex)
{
foreach (var item in this)
array[arrayIndex++] = item;
}
public int Count { get { return collection.Count; } }
public bool IsReadOnly { get { return false; } }
public bool Remove(KeyValuePair<string, string[]> item)
{
if (Contains(item))
return Remove(item.Key);
return false;
}
#endregion
#region IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string,string[]>> Members
public IEnumerator<KeyValuePair<string, string[]>> GetEnumerator()
{
foreach (string key in collection)
yield return new KeyValuePair<string, string[]>(key, collection.GetValues(key));
}
#endregion
#region IEnumerable Members
System.Collections.IEnumerator System.Collections.IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() { return GetEnumerator(); }
#endregion
}
public static class NameValueCollectionExtensions
{
public static NameValueCollectionDictionaryAdapter<TNameValueCollection> ToDictionaryAdapter<TNameValueCollection>(this TNameValueCollection collection)
where TNameValueCollection : NameValueCollection, new()
{
if (collection == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException();
return new NameValueCollectionDictionaryAdapter<TNameValueCollection>(collection);
}
}
public class ReadOnlyCollectionAdapter<TIn, TOut> : CollectionAdapterBase<TIn, TOut, ICollection<TIn>>
{
public ReadOnlyCollectionAdapter(ICollection<TIn> collection, Func<TIn, TOut> toOuter)
: base(() => collection, toOuter)
{
}
public override void Add(TOut item) { throw new NotImplementedException(); }
public override void Clear() { throw new NotImplementedException(); }
public override bool IsReadOnly { get { return true; } }
public override bool Remove(TOut item) { throw new NotImplementedException(); }
}
public abstract class CollectionAdapterBase<TIn, TOut, TCollection> : ICollection<TOut>
where TCollection : ICollection<TIn>
{
readonly Func<TCollection> getCollection;
readonly Func<TIn, TOut> toOuter;
public CollectionAdapterBase(Func<TCollection> getCollection, Func<TIn, TOut> toOuter)
{
if (getCollection == null || toOuter == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException();
this.getCollection = getCollection;
this.toOuter = toOuter;
}
protected TCollection Collection { get { return getCollection(); } }
protected TOut ToOuter(TIn inner) { return toOuter(inner); }
#region ICollection<TOut> Members
public abstract void Add(TOut item);
public abstract void Clear();
public virtual bool Contains(TOut item)
{
var comparer = EqualityComparer<TOut>.Default;
foreach (var member in Collection)
if (comparer.Equals(item, ToOuter(member)))
return true;
return false;
}
public void CopyTo(TOut[] array, int arrayIndex)
{
foreach (var item in this)
array[arrayIndex++] = item;
}
public int Count { get { return Collection.Count; } }
public abstract bool IsReadOnly { get; }
public abstract bool Remove(TOut item);
#endregion
#region IEnumerable<TOut> Members
public IEnumerator<TOut> GetEnumerator()
{
foreach (var item in Collection)
yield return ToOuter(item);
}
#endregion
#region IEnumerable Members
IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() { return GetEnumerator(); }
#endregion
}
Then an adapted can be constructed for a given NameValueCollection Data simply by doing:
var adapter = Data.ToDictionaryAdapter();
Notes:
Using the adapter may be be more performant than simply creating a copied dictionary, and should work well with any serializer that fully supports dictionary serialization.
The adapter might also be useful in using a NameValueCollection with any other code that expects an IDictionary of some sort - this is the fundamental advantage of the adapter pattern.
That being said, JavaScriptSerializer cannot be used with the adapter because this serializer cannot serialize an arbitrary type implementing IDictionary<TKey, TValue> that does not also inherit from Dictionary<TKey, TValue>. For details see Serializing dictionaries with JavaScriptSerializer.
When using DataContractJsonSerializer, a NameValueCollection can be replaced with an adapter in the serialization graph by using the data contract surrogate mechanism.
When using Json.NET a NameValueCollection can be replaced with an adapter using a custom JsonConverter such as the following:
public class NameValueJsonConverter<TNameValueCollection> : JsonConverter
where TNameValueCollection : NameValueCollection, new()
{
public override bool CanConvert(Type objectType)
{
return typeof(TNameValueCollection).IsAssignableFrom(objectType);
}
public override object ReadJson(JsonReader reader, Type objectType, object existingValue, JsonSerializer serializer)
{
if (reader.SkipComments().TokenType == JsonToken.Null)
return null;
// Reuse the existing NameValueCollection if present
var collection = (TNameValueCollection)existingValue ?? new TNameValueCollection();
var dictionaryWrapper = collection.ToDictionaryAdapter();
serializer.Populate(reader, dictionaryWrapper);
return collection;
}
public override void WriteJson(JsonWriter writer, object value, JsonSerializer serializer)
{
var collection = (TNameValueCollection)value;
var dictionaryWrapper = new NameValueCollectionDictionaryAdapter<TNameValueCollection>(collection);
serializer.Serialize(writer, dictionaryWrapper);
}
}
public static partial class JsonExtensions
{
public static JsonReader SkipComments(this JsonReader reader)
{
while (reader.TokenType == JsonToken.Comment && reader.Read())
;
return reader;
}
}
Which could be used e.g. as follows:
string json = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(Data, Formatting.Indented, new NameValueJsonConverter<NameValueCollection>());
NameValueCollection supports all of the following
A null value for a given key;
Multiple values for a given key (in which case NameValueCollection.Item[String] returns a comma-separated list of values);
A single value containing an embedded comma (which cannot be distinguished from the case of multiple values when using NameValueCollection.Item[String]).
Thus the adapter must implement IDictionary<string, string[]> rather than IDictionary<string, string> and also take care to handle a null value array.
Sample fiddle (including some basic unit testing) here: https://dotnetfiddle.net/gVPSi7

Namespace dict?

I'm devising a template language. In it, there are 3 kinds of tokens: tags, directives, and variables. Each of these tokens have a name, and there's getting to be quite a few of them. They're extensible too.
To allow name reuse I want to add namespaces.
Right now all the variables are just stored in a dict. The key is the variable name, and the value is the variable value. That way I can quickly retrieve the value of a variable. However, supposing I want to allow dot-notation, namespace.variable, how can I store these variables, such that the namespace is optional? If the namespace is included the dict should only scan that namespace, if not, I guess it scans all namespaces.
Is there a container that will do this?
You should structure your symbol data internally as a dictionary of dictionary of string. The top level dictionary is for namespaces, and each dictionary below each namespace name is the container for all symbols in that namespace.
Looking up an unqualified symbol is simply a matter of looking for the symbol in each namespace in a particular order. In C# or Delphi, the order is determined by the order in which the namespaces are declared at the top of the source file, in reverse order of declaration (most recent is the first to be searched).
You can create your own implementation of IDictionary<string, object> instead of using the framework's Dictionary<TKey, TValue>.
Externally, there would be no change to the way you are consuming it.
Internally, it would consist of a Dictionary<string, Dictionary<string, object>>.
So, if your dictionary is asked for the value matching key "namespace.variable", internally it would split that string, get the Dictionary<string, Dictionary<string, object>> with key "namespace" and then return the value in that Dictionary<string, object> for key "variable."
To make the namespace optional, you have one entry where the key is string.Empty. Whether adding or getting items, any time a key is provided that does not contain ., you'll use the entry with key string.Empty.
My solution:
Class
public class NamespaceDictionary<T> : IDictionary<string, T>
{
private SortedDictionary<string, Dictionary<string, T>> _dict;
private const char _separator = '.';
public NamespaceDictionary()
{
_dict = new SortedDictionary<string, Dictionary<string, T>>();
}
public NamespaceDictionary(IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string, T>> collection)
: this()
{
foreach (var item in collection)
Add(item);
}
#region Implementation of IEnumerable
public IEnumerator<KeyValuePair<string, T>> GetEnumerator()
{
return _dict.SelectMany(x => x.Value).GetEnumerator();
}
IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator()
{
return GetEnumerator();
}
#endregion
private static Tuple<string, string> Split(string name)
{
int pos = name.LastIndexOf(_separator);
string ns = pos == -1 ? "" : name.Substring(0, pos);
string var = name.Substring(pos + 1);
return new Tuple<string, string>(ns, var);
}
#region Implementation of ICollection<KeyValuePair<string,TValue>>
public void Add(KeyValuePair<string, T> item)
{
Add(item.Key, item.Value);
}
public void Clear()
{
_dict.Clear();
}
public bool Contains(KeyValuePair<string, T> item)
{
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
public void CopyTo(KeyValuePair<string, T>[] array, int arrayIndex)
{
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
public bool Remove(KeyValuePair<string, T> item)
{
return Remove(item.Key);
}
public int Count
{
get { return _dict.Sum(p => p.Value.Count); }
}
public bool IsReadOnly
{
get { return false; }
}
#endregion
#region Implementation of IDictionary<string,TValue>
public bool ContainsKey(string name)
{
var tuple = Split(name);
return ContainsKey(tuple.Item1, tuple.Item2);
}
public bool ContainsKey(string ns, string key)
{
if (ns == "")
return _dict.Any(pair => pair.Value.ContainsKey(key));
return _dict.ContainsKey(ns) && _dict[ns].ContainsKey(key);
}
public void Add(string name, T value)
{
var tuple = Split(name);
Add(tuple.Item1, tuple.Item2, value);
}
public void Add(string ns, string key, T value)
{
if (!_dict.ContainsKey(ns))
_dict[ns] = new Dictionary<string, T>();
_dict[ns].Add(key, value);
}
public bool Remove(string ns, string key)
{
if (_dict.ContainsKey(ns) && _dict[ns].ContainsKey(key))
{
if (_dict[ns].Count == 1) _dict.Remove(ns);
else _dict[ns].Remove(key);
return true;
}
return false;
}
public bool Remove(string key)
{
var tuple = Split(key);
return Remove(tuple.Item1, tuple.Item2);
}
public bool TryGetValue(string name, out T value)
{
var tuple = Split(name);
return TryGetValue(tuple.Item1, tuple.Item2, out value);
}
public bool TryGetValue(string ns, string key, out T value)
{
if (ns == "")
{
foreach (var pair in _dict)
{
if (pair.Value.ContainsKey(key))
{
value = pair.Value[key];
return true;
}
}
}
else if (_dict.ContainsKey(ns) && _dict[ns].ContainsKey(key))
{
value = _dict[ns][key];
return true;
}
value = default(T);
return false;
}
public T this[string ns, string key]
{
get
{
if (ns == "")
{
foreach (var pair in _dict)
if (pair.Value.ContainsKey(key))
return pair.Value[key];
}
else if (_dict.ContainsKey(ns) && _dict[ns].ContainsKey(key))
return _dict[ns][key];
throw new KeyNotFoundException();
}
set
{
if (!_dict.ContainsKey(ns))
_dict[ns] = new Dictionary<string, T>();
_dict[ns][key] = value;
}
}
public T this[string name]
{
get
{
var tuple = Split(name);
return this[tuple.Item1, tuple.Item2];
}
set
{
var tuple = Split(name);
this[tuple.Item1, tuple.Item2] = value;
}
}
public ICollection<string> Keys
{
get { return _dict.SelectMany(p => p.Value.Keys).ToArray(); }
}
public ICollection<T> Values
{
get { return _dict.SelectMany(p => p.Value.Values).ToArray(); }
}
#endregion
}
Test
var dict = new NamespaceDictionary<int>();
dict.Add("ns1.var1", 1);
dict.Add("ns2.var1", 2);
dict.Add("var2", 3);
dict.Add("ns2.var2", 4);
dict.Add("ns3", "var1", 5);
dict["ns4.var1"] = 6;
Console.WriteLine(dict["var1"]);
Console.WriteLine(dict["ns2.var1"]);
Console.WriteLine(dict["var2"]);
Console.WriteLine(dict["ns2.var2"]);
Console.WriteLine(dict["ns2", "var2"]);
Console.WriteLine(dict["ns3.var1"]);
Console.WriteLine(dict["ns4", "var1"]);
Output
1
2
3
4
4
5
6
Help
I used a SortedDictionary thinking it would retain the order that the namespaces were added, but it's actually sorting the namespaces alphabetically. Is there an dict class that will retain the order the items were added, but not sort them?

Categories

Resources