Well this is maybe a little different than other array based conversion questions, but I'm dealing with forced typing concerns due to interface implementation and thus would like a few opinions on the process. I've basically redesigned the Collection suite for .Net because I don't like the extreme simplicity of the default Collections and dictionaries, as well, when I want the more complex concepts I don't want to have rewrite the same collection over an over again.
Is there any way to define a Generic in VB.NET which will accept only Singles or Doubles? I tried the following things, based on what I've found online, but none compile:
Dim target As Nullable(Of {Single, Double}) Dim target As Nullable(Of T As {Single, Double}) Dim target As Nullable(Of T {Single, Double}) Dim target As Nullable(Of Single, Double) Dim target As Nullable(Of T As Single, Double)
I want to specify that target can either be a Single? or a Double? only.
I'm trying register presenters with Windsor using the convention based method but trying to do this in VB.NET, but the problem is it does not want to compile this statement:
Dim type = GetType(AbstractPresenter(Of))
I am getting : Too few type arguments to AbstractPresenter(Of TView, TPresenter)
Which I don't understand because this is a valid statement according to question. Also showing valid in other C# to VB.NET converters when converting typeof(AbstractPresenter<>).
Maybe I am just not reading the MSDN documentation correctly, but given a function that takes in one string parameter and returns type T, how can this be specifed as a shared function using Func()?
MSDN says Func(Of In T1, Out TResult), but all of their examples use the same data type, i.e., Func(Of String, String). I want to do Func(Of In String, Out T), where T is arbitrary (but I can constrain it if necessary by a base class). I want it shared/static at the class level, yet the encapsulating class will itself not be a generic class. It seems in this specific scenario, it's impossible to do what I want because the compiler would have no way of knowing what Type T is at runtime.
So is it possible to do generics on delegates or anonymous lambda expressions in VB.net (not C#)?
I am using VB.Net. I have an object class called clsA(of T as clsB). Depending on what T is, I want to do different things. Let's say that clsC and clsD both inherit clsB and therefore can be used for T.
If I have an instance of clsA(of clsC), how can I get the inside type (i.e. clsC) using reflection?
Is there an exhaustive list of all of the "base" (not used in an object-oriented sense but more in a common sense) generic types in the 4.0 .NET Framework? I have found this list that I often send newer/mid-level devs to so they can understand how non-generic types map to generic types, but this is by no means exhaustive. I'm looking for something that also includes things such as KeyValuePair<>, Tuple<>, and other basic generics that may not be very-well known. Interfaces such as IObservable<> would be nice but not necessarily required.
Is there a way to use a generic that only accepts integer types?
I have a Clamp(value, min, max) function, and it would be nice if it could accept ints, uints, floats, shorts, ect without having to write an individual function for each type.
I'm trying to write a class that will be in charge of persisting application options. Since the options need to be persisted the values that I'm sent must be serialisable.
Initially I thought I've be able to write a method with a signature like this[code]...
I want to generate 3 different types of arrays but 2 include a negative number and Im not really sure how to do that. The first type should generate 0 to 2 (which works): num = Int(Rnd() * (2 - 0 + 1)) + 0 Now I need one that generates -1, 0, or 1. and another that generates -2, -1, or 0.
addressing the need for getting the bytes of an object. But I am wondering if there is an approach to calling BitConverter.GetBytes on a generic type where I know the type is a primitive (Int32, UInt16, etc).
Public Sub Foobar(Of T as Structure)() Dim x as T 'Assume T is declared as Int32 Dim y() as Byte y = System.BitConverter.GetBytes(x) End Sub
The above will throw your usual error:
Overload resolution failed because no accessible 'GetBytes' can be called with these arguments: 'Public Shared Function GetBytes(value As Double) As Byte()': Value of type 'T' cannot be converted to 'Double'. 'Public Shared Function GetBytes(value As Single) As Byte()': Value of type 'T' cannot be converted to 'Single'.
[code]....
One solution I think would work is a large Select Case calling GetType(), but that is horrendously slow (because of boxing) and looks ugly. I would think that since I call my higher level class with a primitive data type for T, that the compiler would be smart enough to figure it out, but I assume I am not providing enough information for it to derive what T's underlying value is at compile time for the invoked instances.
Suppose I want to write a function like the following (as usual, a trivial example for illustrative purposes):
Public Function calcSqSum(Of T)(ByVal list As IEnumerable(Of T)) As T Dim sumSq As T For Each item As T In list
[Code]....
As you can probably guess, this function causes an error because a generic object is not guaranteed to implement the + operator. As far as I know, though, any numerical type (Integer, Double, Decimal, etc.) will.
Is there a way to write a (quasi-)generic function that can accept any numerical type, without having to explicitly overload the function for every such type yourself?
Alternatively, I suppose an equally acceptable solution would be to somehow check if a type implements the '+' operator (or any operator generally associated with numerical types and used by the function).
I need to use some functions from a DLL written in C++. Problem is when I try to use those functions in VB (Visual Studio). The only way I get to pass the debugger without errors is if I use the VariantType type, but I get all screwed up values. Can anyone tell me how can I "translate" the use of char [6] into VB from C++? My problem when Implementing is with the variable INFO, the content comes back after execution with errors..This is the original code from the DLL Manual:
Code: Int Get_Info(A Handle, char *IPAddr, InfoType *Info) where the parameters: A [IN] Handle. IPAddr [IN] IP address
We are currently converting a larger legacy application from .Net1.1 to .Net2.0, both VB. Our new standard is Generic List, instead of arrays.We are recoding component by component. And while not everything is yet stored in generic.list we end up with compile time errors.Converting from generic.list to array is supported with myGenList.ToArray().But from array to generic list isnt that easy."Value of type '1-dimensional array of something' cannot be convertet to 'System.Collection.Generic.List(of something)"I know for sertain that the array consist of the type 'something', so an runtime exception converting is ok.Is there a good way to do the workaround untill the hole application is recoded?
I am very confuse over a Raise Events example and using delegate as a function pointer: I am clear with this function pointer example program below which creates a generic sort function for sorting integer arrays without changing the main sort function. ' Returns True if need to swap Delegate Function CompareFunc(ByVal x As Integer, _ ByVal y As Integer) _ As Boolean
Here are two alternative target methods for the delegate - one for an ascending sort and one for a descending sort: Function SortAscending(ByVal x As Integer, ByVal y As Integer) As Boolean If y < x Then SortAscending = True End If End Function Function SortDescending(ByVal x As Integer, _ ByVal y As Integer) As Boolean [Code] .....
Is there a technical reason why there is no implicit conversion from DBNull to the various nullable and/or sql types? I understand why the conversions don't currently happen, but don't understand why an implicit conversion wasn't created at the time or added in subsequent versions of the framework.Just to be clear, I'm looking for technical reasons, not "because that's they way they did it" or "I like it that way".
I have a generic Class I'm using to hold information loaded from a database.I have a method which takes a DataRow as an argument, uses the object's known column name and extracts the data from the DataRow, such that:Dim loadData As T = CType(myDataRow("myColumnName"), T))works as my default assignment in most cases.Unfortunately, due to some horrifying design constraints, some of my columns may be null, and may also be taken from enumerations.This means that when <T> is Nullable(Of SomeEnumeration) the above code does not work because I can't cast 0 directly to SomeEnumeration.Zero.Is there some way to check whether <T> is Nullable(Of [Enum])? Or some way to write a method which allows Integers to be cast to Nullable(Of [Enum])?I feel like I'm forgetting something that would allow me to write one of the other of these, but my weak google-fu is turning up nothing.
EDIT: Okay, thanks to dasblinkenlight's answer below, I can detect when this circumstance is occurring, but what I need to do now is to take a type <T> which I know is Nullable(Of SomeClass), get a type reference to SomeClass and then create a new object of type Nullable(Of SomeClass) and assign that to LoadData.My problem was that I had a lot of difficulty in finding any function which would accept baseType as an actual Type.Parse accepted baseType as a parameter, I knew baseType was an [Enum] type because of dasblinkenlight's code, so I was, in this instance, able to code a solution. It's a solution which is very specific to my problem (i.e., T is Nullable(of SomeEnumeration)), but it's a solution nonetheless.
Im working on my first n-tier application. I am trying to serialize a structure and Im getting an error"Soap Serializer does not support serializing Generic Types : System.Nullable`1[System.DateTime]."Here is the structure that is being serialized Namespace Structures
<Serializable()> _ Public Structure structAllergy Public AllergyID As String Public ProfileID As String
[code]....
The bold line is the line that is throwing the error.
We have migrated our Vb6 application to VB.NET using a third party tool. Now we are in a process of Refactoring and introducing object oriented concepts in the application.
In VB6, we were using structures in many places. As a part of introducing object oriented programming,
1. is it a good idea of changing all Structures to Classes? or Is there a concept of "Generic Structure" similar to Generic collections, Generic classes?
2. Can some one guide me any source containing guide lines or best practices for applications that are migrated to VB.NET from VB6 and implementing object oriented programmaing.
Public MustInherit Class Column Public ReadOnly Property ReturnSomethingUseful() As Object Get 'return something useful
[code]....
But this gives the following error:
Public Overrides Function ParseValue(sValue As String) As Boolean' cannot override 'Public Overridable Function ParseValue(sValue As String) As Object' because they differ by their return types.
I accept that you can't do this, but I'd like to be able to preserve the semantics of what I'm. trying to do, which is to have an untyped version that deals with Object, but a typed version in derived classes that knows about the specific type T.
I have a class with a Property called 'Value' which is of type Object.Value can be of any type, a structure, a class, an array, IList etc.My problem is with the setter and determining whether the value has changed or not.This is simple enough for value types, but reference types and lists present a problem.For a class, would you assume that the Equals method has been implemented correctly, or just assume that the value has changed every time the setter is called?If I did assume it's changed, then perhaps I should assume it for value types as well, so that the behaviour is consistent.
I am trying to construct a generic interface class with generic functions. My goal was to use this to implement multiple worker classes for database interaction that have the same basic functionality. Each class will deal with different object for example, category, product or supplier but unless the the functions in the interface are generic that this won't work.This is the interface code that I have but I don't know if I have done it correctly. [code]
I am trying to create a list of a generic type in vb.net 2.0 framework. This is the generic type definition:
Public Class GenericParamMap(Of T) Public Sub New(ByVal pParamName As String, ByVal pPropValue As T) mParamName = pParamName
[Code]....
The compiler does not allow a "T" in the method's parameter because it's not defined, but I'm not sure how or where to define it. I thought it was okay to have a generic method definition.
I am trying to write a generic method, to avoid code duplication, which will create or activate a Form as an MDI children, based on its type. But I have to lines in error (see comments).
In VB6 I load a recordset containg all of the records (6 fields per record)in a table into an XArray and then manipulate the records in the array and then write them back to the original table. The array issorted by the first field (1 to maybe 8000 or more) I need to find records in the array by an ID field and then move them (because of some external criteria that happens many times) from say number 400 to number 375. Then all of the other records between 375 and 399 were renumbered up 1 to fill the gaps left by the move.
The XArray worked well as it could find and also move to a next record easily to facilitate the revisions to each record quickly. Everything is done in VB6 in code and nothing visual needs to be shown to the user until say 2000 of these external changes are complete. What is the best, most efficient way to do this in the .Net framework in VB2010. Datasets, Dataviews. tableadapters, arrays. enums ?
My assignment is to have a user enter in big integers using what i think is two parallel arrays. I got this far but now im stuck. I think i need to actually convert the text box input into an array but i do not know how to do that. I am all over the place in this project.
'Created/ Revised by: Jessica Falcetta 'Cap 204 Final Project: Big Integer Project 'Project Purpose: To calculate large integers through parallel arrays
