We use a lot of Generics in our code. For example ICommandHandler<T> where T is ICommand, ICommandValidator<T> etc etc
Not everything has a ICommandValidator implementation. I was looking to use the NullObject pattern so that I could provide a fall back option to avoid having to test if validator is null.
For example
public class NullObjectCommandValidator : ICommandValidator<ICommand>
{
public bool IsValid(ICommand command)
{
return true;
}
}
We register all like:
builder.RegisterAssemblyTypes(assemblies)
.AsClosedTypesOf(typeof(ICommandValidator<>))
.InstancePerHttpRequest();
I was hoping to be able to register the NullObjectCommandValidator as a default for any ICommandValidator that didn't have a concrete implementation using a process like registering all other ICommandValidators<> and then registering the Null version at the end and preserving existing defaults.
Is something like this possible?
You should change NullObjectCommandValidator to a generic type NullObjectCommandValidator<TCommand>. This way you can register it as follows:
builder.RegisterGeneric(typeof(NullObjectCommandValidator<>))
.As(typeof(ICommandValidator<>));
NullObjectCommandValidator<TCommand> looks like this:
public class NullObjectCommandValidator<TCommand> : ICommandValidator<TCommand>
{
public bool IsValid(TCommand command)
{
return true;
}
}
Related
I am trying to create a new implementation of IPersistenceStore.
I understand I need to register my new implementation by using a IServiceLocator which is configured in the glimpse node of my web.config like so:
<glimpse defaultRuntimePolicy="On" endpointBaseUri="~/Glimpse.axd" serviceLocatorType="MyNewServiceLocator, MyAssembly">
However, I am seeing the following behaviour:
The GetInstance method of my IServiceLocator is never hit
The ctor of my new IPersistenceStore is hit at app start up
No other methods on my IPersistenceStore are ever hit (ie the Glimpse data is still being stored in the default impl of IPersistenceStore)
It appears that my IPersistenceStore is not being registered correctly. Why could this be?
It's not clear what could be wrong, as you don't show any of your code related to the IServiceLocator
Something along these lines should suffice to have your custom persistence store returned by your custom service locator:
public class MyNewServiceLocator : IServiceLocator
{
public T GetInstance<T>() where T : class
{
var type = typeof(T);
if (type == typeof(IPersistenceStore))
{
return new CustomPersistenceStore() as T;
}
return null;
}
public ICollection<T> GetAllInstances<T>() where T : class
{
return null;
}
}
If the following is entered in Eclipse/STS (with groovy):
interface iFaceWithAnIssue {
def thisIsFine(a,b,c)
def thisHasProblems(alpha='va')
}
The only line that complains is the one trying to use a default value. I can not tell from the codehaus site if this is supported or not.
The IDE error is:
Groovy:Cannot specify default value for method parameter
So this makes me think it is not supported. As there will be multiple implementations, I wanted to use an interface here. I don't really need the default value in the interface, but there is an error trying to fulfill the interface contract if the implementation class then tries to default this argument. Is there any way?
No, you cannot.
When you define a default value, Groovy actually creates multiple methods in your class, so for example:
class Test {
void something( a=false ) {
println a
}
}
Actually creates
public void something(java.lang.Object a) {
this.println(a)
}
and
public void something() {
this.something(((false) as java.lang.Object))
}
This can't be done as it stands in Interfaces.
You could do:
interface iFaceWithAnIssue {
def thisHasProblems()
def thisHasProblems(alpha)
}
Then
class Test implements iFaceWithAnIssue {
// This covers both Inteface methods
def thisHasProblems(alpha='va') {
// do something
}
}
Suppose I have a List<IMyInterface>...
I have three classes which implement IMyInterface: MyClass1, MyClass2, and MyClass3
I have a readonly Dictionary:
private static readonly Dictionary<Type, Type> DeclarationTypes = new Dictionary<Type, Type>
{
{ typeof(MyClass1), typeof(FunnyClass1) },
{ typeof(MyClass2), typeof(FunnyClass2) },
{ typeof(MyClass3), typeof(FunnyClass3) },
};
I have another interface, IFunnyInteface<T> where T : IMyInterface
I have a method:
public static IFunnyInterface<T> ConvertToFunnyClass<T>(this T node) where T : IMyInterface
{
if (DeclarationTypes.ContainsKey(node.GetType())) {
IFunnyInterface<T> otherClassInstance = (FunnyInterface<T>) Activator.CreateInstance(DeclarationTypes[node.GetType()], node);
return otherClassInstance;
}
return null;
}
I'm trying to call the constructor of FunnyClasses and insert as parameter my MyClass object. I don't want to know which object it is: I just want to instantiate some FunnyClass with MyClass as a parameter.
What happens when I call ConvertToFunnyClass, T is of type IMyInterface, and when I try to cast it to FunnyInterface<T>, it says I can't convert FunnyClass1, for instance, to FunnyInterface<IMyInterface>
My current workaround (not a beautiful one), is this:
public static dynamic ConvertToFunnyClass<T>(this T node) where T : IMyInterface
{
if (DeclarationTypes.ContainsKey(node.GetType())) {
var otherClassInstance = (FunnyInterface<T>) Activator.CreateInstance(DeclarationTypes[node.GetType()], node);
return otherClassInstance;
}
return null;
}
And I don't like it because the return type is dynamic, so when I access it from somewhere else, I have no idea what type it is, and I lose intellisense, and stuff. I don't know about any performance implications either.
Any clues?
Thanks in Advance!
Resolution
As I'm using C# 4.0, I could stop casting errors using covariance (output positions only), and so I changed my IFunnyInterface to
IFunnyInteface<out T> where T : IMyInterface
Thank you all for the replies.
Essentially, your problem is that you are trying to convert FunnyInterface<T> to FunnyInterface<IMyInterface>. As has been mentioned several times (one example is here, more information here), this is not valid in most circumstances. Only in .NET 4, when the generic type is an interface or delegate, and the type parameter has been explicitly declared as variant with in or out, can you perform this conversion.
Is FunnyInterface actually an interface?
thecoop answer points you exactly to why you can't do it.
A cleaner solution to the problem (besides using dynamic) would be a base non-Generics Interface:
public interface IFunnyInterfaceBase
{
}
public interface IFunnyInteface<T> : IFunnyInterfaceBase
where T : IMyInterface
{
}
And you need to move methods signature you use in that code from IFunnyInteface to IFunnyInterfaceBase.
This way you would be able to write something like this:
MyClass2 c2 = new MyClass2();
IFunnyInterfaceBase funnyInstance = c2.ConvertToFunnyClass();
The Exception you said you got in your code is not due to the extension method signature itself (the method is fine)..it is originated by the type of your lvalue (the type of the variable you use to store its return value)!
Obviously this solution applies only if you can modify IFunnyInterface source code!
I'm struggling with implementing a factory object. Here's the context :
I've in a project a custom store. In order to read/write records, I've written this code in a POCO model/separated repository:
public class Id { /* skip for clarity*/} // My custom ID representation
public interface IId
{
Id Id { get; set; }
}
public interface IGenericRepository<T> where T : IId
{
T Get(Id objectID);
void Save(T #object);
}
public interface IContext
{
TRepository GetRepository<T, TRepository>()
where TRepository : IGenericRepository<T>
where T:IId;
IGenericRepository<T> GetRepository<T>()
where T:IId;
}
My IContext interface defines two kind of repositories.
The former is for standard objects with only get/save methods, the later allows me to define specifics methods for specific kind of objects. For example :
public interface IWebServiceLogRepository : IGenericRepository<WebServiceLog>
{
ICollection<WebServiceLog> GetOpenLogs(Id objectID);
}
And it the consuming code I can do one of this :
MyContext.GetRepository<Customer>().Get(myID); --> standard get
MyContext.GetRepository<WebServiceLog, IWebServiceLogRepository>().GetOpenLogs(myID); --> specific operation
Because most of objects repository are limited to get and save operations, I've written a generic repository :
public class BaseRepository<T> : IGenericRepository<T>
where T : IId, new()
{
public virtual T Get(Id objectID){ /* provider specific */ }
public void Save(T #object) { /* provider specific */ }
}
and, for custom ones, I simply inherits the base repository :
internal class WebServiceLogRepository: BaseRepository<WebServiceLog>, IWebServiceLogRepository
{
public ICollection<WebServiceLog> GetByOpenLogsByRecordID(Id objectID)
{
/* provider specific */
}
}
Everything above is ok (at least I think it's ok). I'm now struggling to implement the MyContext class. I'm using MEF in my project for other purposes. But because MEF doesn't support (yet) generic exports, I did not find a way to reach my goal.
My context class is looking like by now :
[Export(typeof(IContext))]
public class UpdateContext : IContext
{
private System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<Type, object> m_Implementations;
public UpdateContext()
{
m_Implementations = new System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<Type, object>();
}
public TRepository GetRepository<T, TRepository>()
where T : IId
where TRepository : IGenericRepository<T>
{
var tType = typeof(T);
if (!m_Implementations.ContainsKey(tType))
{
/* this code is neither working nor elegant for me */
var resultType = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies().SelectMany(
(a) => a.GetTypes()
).Where((t)=>t.GetInterfaces().Contains(typeof(TRepository))).Single();
var result = (TRepository)resultType.InvokeMember("new", System.Reflection.BindingFlags.CreateInstance, null, null, new object[] { this });
m_Implementations.Add(tType, result);
}
return (TRepository)m_Implementations[tType];
}
public IGenericRepository<T> GetRepository<T>() where T : IId
{
return GetRepository<T, IGenericRepository<T>>();
}
}
I'd appreciate a bit of help to unpuzzle my mind with this quite common scenario
Not sure if I've understood you correctly, but I think you're perhaps over complicating things. To begin with, make sure you've designed your code independent of any factory or Dependency Injection framework or composition framework.
For starters lets look at what you want your calling code to look like, this is what you said:
MyContext.GetRepository<Customer>().Get(myID); --> standard get
MyContext.GetRepository<WebServiceLog, IWebServiceLogRepository>().GetOpenLogs(myID);
You don't have to agree with my naming choices below, but it indicates what I undertand from your code, you can tell me if I'm wrong. Now, I feel like the calling would be simpler like this:
RepositoryFactory.New<IRepository<Customer>>().Get(myId);
RepositoryFactory.New<IWebServiceLogRepository>().GetOpenLogs(myId);
Line 1:
Because the type here is IRepository it's clear what the return type is, and what the T type is for the base IRepository.
Line 2:
The return type here from the factory is IWebServiceLogRepository. Here you don'y need to specify the entity type, your interface logically already implements IRepository. There's no need to specify this again.
So your interface for these would look like this:
public interface IRepository<T>
{
T Get(object Id);
T Save(T object);
}
public interface IWebServiceLogRepository: IRepository<WebServiceLog>
{
List<WebServiceLog> GetOpenLogs(object Id);
}
Now I think the implementations and factory code for this would be simpler as the factory only has to know about a single type. On line 1 the type is IRepository, and in line 2, IWebServiceLogRepository.
Try that, and try rewriting your code to simply find classes that implement those types and instantiating them.
Lastly, in terms of MEF, you could carry on using that, but Castle Windsor would really make things much simpler for you, as it lets you concentrate on your architecture and code design, and its very very simple to use. You only ever reference Castle in your app startup code. The rest of your code is simply designed using the Dependency Injection pattern, which is framework agnostic.
If some of this isn't clear, let me know if you'd like me to update this answer with the implementation code of your repositories too.
UPDATE
and here's the code which resolves the implementations. You were making it a bit harder for yourself by not using the Activator class.
If you use Activator and use only one Generic parameter as I've done in the method below, you should be ok. Note the code's a bit rough but you get the idea:
public static T GetThing<T>()
{
List<Type> assemblyTypes = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()
.SelectMany(s => s.GetTypes()).ToList();
Type interfaceType = typeof(T);
if(interfaceType.IsGenericType)
{
var gens = interfaceType.GetGenericArguments();
List<Type> narrowed = assemblyTypes.Where(p => p.IsGenericType && !p.IsInterface).ToList();
var implementations = new List<Type>();
narrowed.ForEach(t=>
{
try
{
var imp = t.MakeGenericType(gens);
if(interfaceType.IsAssignableFrom(imp))
{
implementations.Add(imp);
}
}catch
{
}
});
return (T)Activator.CreateInstance(implementations.First());
}
else
{
List<Type> implementations = assemblyTypes.Where(p => interfaceType.IsAssignableFrom(p) && !p.IsInterface).ToList();
return (T)Activator.CreateInstance(implementations.First());
}
}
I'd like make possible a generic method overload.
Since I need to create an ObjectSet<..> without knowing the generic type contained in, I wold build something like this:
public IQueryable<T> MyMethod<T>() where T : class, (IMyFirst || IMySecond) //notice the syntax..!
{
if(typeOf(T) is IMyFirst..
else ...
}
How can I reach my purpose..?
Update:
#BrokenGlass wrote:
This type of constraint is not possible in C# - you could however constrain to IFoo and have IMyFirst and IMySecond both implement IFoo.
But that suggestion is not applicable, please see this:
interface1 { property1 {..}}
interface2 { property2 {..}}
interfaceIFoo : interface1, interface2 { }
by any method:
MyWrapper.Retrieve<EntityProduct>(myObjContext); //error-> EntityProduct implements interface1 only!!
by other any method:
MyWrapper.Retrieve<EntityOrder>(myObjContext); //error-> EntityOrder implements interface2 only!!
and here:
public static IQueryable<T> Retrieve<T>(ObjectContext context) where T :class, interfaceIFoo
{
var query = context.CreateObjectSet<T>().AsQueryable();
//...
This type of constraint is not possible in C# - you could however constrain to IFoo and have IMyFirst and IMySecond both implement IFoo.
If you can live with dependencies on Entity Framework you could alternatively also use EntityObject
A disjunctive generic constraint doesn't really make sense. Those constraints provide compile-time information to the method, so there's not much point in constraints that result in an ambiguous type at compile time. For instance, if your method is just going to resort to run-time type checking, you might as well just do this:
public IQueryable<T> MyMethod<T>() where T : class
{
if (typeOf(T) is IMyFirst) ...
else ...
}
If you feel you need the type checking on input and a pseudo-abstraction, perhaps extension methods that happen to be identically named would suffice:
public static IQueryable<IMyFirst> MyMethod(this IMyFirst input)
{
return ...
}
public static IQueryable<IMySecond> MyMethod(this IMySecond input)
{
return ...
}