I have a generic function in VB.Net. I also have two classes called A and B. Is it possible to allow the generic constraints on my function to allow the Type to be either class A or B? Class A and B do not share any base classes except for object.
View 1 RepliesThis is the code I'm trying to develop:
Public Structure Statistic(Of t)
Dim maxStat As t
Dim curStat As t
[Code].....
Consider the following extension method:
<Extension()> _
Public Function Satisfies(Of T)(ByVal subject As T, ByVal specification As ISpecification(Of T)) As Boolean
Return specification.IsSatisfiedBy(subject)
End Function
This works as expected if subject is the exact class being operated on by the specification. However, if the specification is examining the super-class of T, this extension will not work unless subject is explicitly cast to the super-class. Is there a way I can avoid this? So far, the best I've been able to come up with is:
[Code]...
Since I (apparently) can't get this to work exactly as I'd like in VB.NET due to limitations in the language itself, is my second attempt the safest/most efficient way to do this?
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]...
When I write the following statement in VB.Net (C# is my normal language), I get an "end of statement expected" referring to the "Implements" statement.
<Serializable()> _
<XmlSchemaProvider("EtgSchema")> _
Public Class SerializeableEntity(Of T As {Class, ISerializable, New}) _
Implements IXmlSerializable, ISerializable
...
End Class
The C# version that I'm trying to emulate is:
[Serializable]
[XmlSchemaProvider("MySchema")]
public class SerializableEntity<T> : IXmlSerializable, ISerializable where T : class, new()
{
....
}
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.
I am starting to play with extension methods and i came across with this problem:In the next scenario i get a: "extension method has a type constraint that can never be satisfied"
Public Interface IKeyedObject(Of TKey As IEquatable(Of TKey))
ReadOnly Property InstanceKey() As TKey
End Interface
[Code]...
There were three similar questions in StackOverFlow but none gave an answer.. If have found why this error in occurring but don't know the fix. I am using Strongly Typed Dataset for my project which is created as a dll for DAL. I have added the Sql Server Table into this dataset using the designer and has created a DataAdapter
[Code]...
Consider:
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 Journal that records entries for different types: Journal(Of ParentT)
[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).
[Code]...
I need to create a generic for all the classes having common data.I am having a Test.xsd dataset.In that dataset I am having 3 Table Adapter.
pgaddressTableAdapter1
pgaddressTableAdapter2
pgaddressTableAdapter3
Code is here. You can see all these classes having same methods. I want to create a generic class for these class.
[Code]...
If I have a generic.list(of ClassA), is there a simple way to create a deep copy of this list that will not affect the original copy? It seems to work if I have a generic list of Structures, but for some reason the copy constructor for lists of classes only copies pointers to the elements (or maybe a pointer to the whole list?). I would move to structures if it were not for the fact that I can't find a way to edit the members in the structs in the list. eg:list(0).a = 5 'Does not workIs there some way to get around this without declaring an instance of that structure, like this:dim str as StructA = list(0)str.a = 5I'd
View 2 RepliesI'm trying to create a base interface for a class of mine that uses generics. However, I cannot figure out how to declare a property of the interface when its type won't be defined until the class is initialized.
To clarify, consider List(of T), which according to msdn, implements IList (among other things). Note that IList is not the same as its generic counterpart IList(Of T). So that mean any List(of T) can be converted to IList, which simply returns an object for its items. That's what I want to do with MyClass(of T), be able to cast it as IMyClass regardless of what T is.
But when I try such as:
Interface IMyClass
Prop A as Object
Class MyClass(of T) Implements IMyClass
Prop A as T Implements IMyClass.A
I get a signature error for the last line, even though object is broader than T. What am I doing wrong, or how exactly did Microsoft manage to make List(of T) implement IList?
I'm compiling a VB.Net 2.0 app (created in VS2008) using msbuild, and now I've added a generic return type, it's giving me the following:
Warning: Type library exporter encountered a generic type instance in a signature. Generic code may not be exported to COM.
Having just spent ages removing all of the previous warnings, I don't really want to add a new one. Any idea how to get rid of it (aside from not using generics)?I don't know what details I'd put in the attribute, or what number to put in the project-level ignore list.
I have a question about ASP.Net, visual basic I have 2 LINQ query's, the first one works, the second one doesnt, produces a
"Unable to cast object of type 'System.Data.Objects.ObjectQuery'1[SelmaV2.Products]' to type 'System.Collections.Generic.List'1[System.String]'.
[Code]....
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.
I have an interface that i have declared some of the basic internal functions, subs, properties, etc. This interface is then implemented into 3 pre-defined classes. These classes are end-use classes so they dont get derived or inherited elsewhere. I am trying to create a generic shared class that can operate on each of these 3 predefined classes and potentially more as long as they implement the interface.
[Code]...
In trying to add a bit of usage variety to a generic class I'm working on, I ran into this issue with trying to cast an object into an interface instance where the interface is defined inside the generic class.
[Code]...
1) VB Allows non-type template parameters2) VB supports explicit specialization 3) VB allows the type parameters to be used as the base class for the generic type4) VB allows a generic type parameter itself to to be a generic 5) VB enforces that all codes are valid for all types of parametrs
View 1 RepliesI'm getting an error after sending a list to a web service.This is the code that is calling the web service:
Dim sProgramInterest As New List(Of Integer)
crmService.InsertProspectGetId(sProgramInterest.ToList)
But I'm getting this error.
[code].....
And here is the code that produces the error
CODE:
How can i cast this one?
I'm trying to declare a generic using a variable of type System.Type, with VB 2005, and haven't found the right approach. Consider the typical:
Dim m_GenObj As MyGenericObject(of T)
Instead of using "T" I want to use a variable of System.Type, for something like:
Dim m_MyType as Type
Dim m_GenObj as MyGenericObject(of m_MyType)
But of course that doesn't work.
Someone (w69rdy) in Stack Overflow helped me out with a great example to handle DB output, that could potentially be NULL, passed into a function. The problem is I can understand the method as written in C# but I am having a problem understanding how to rewrite the method in VB.NET. The method uses generics and I am lost. Here is the method written in C# ..
public T ParseValue<T>(System.Data.SqlClient.SqlDataReader reader, string column)
{
T result = default(T);
if (!reader.IsDBNull(reader.GetOrdinal(column)))
[code].....
How is this written in VB.NET? How does the method signature change when returning a generic type?
I have the following sample code in a VB.NET console application. It compiles and works, but feels like a hack. Is there a way to define EmptyChild so that it inherits from Intermediate(Of T As Class) without using the dummy EmptyClass?
Module Module1
Sub Main()
Dim Child1 = New RealChild()[code].....
The other way to do this would be to move the generic code out of the Base class and then create 2 Intermediate classes like this [code]...
Then RealChild would inherit from the generic Intermediate and EmptyChild would inherit from the non-generic Intermediate. My problem with that solution is that the Base class is in a separate assembly and I need to keep the code that handles the generic type in that assembly. And there is functionality in the Intermediate class that does not belong in the assembly with the Base class.
I'm in the process of creating a function which reflects over the properties in a class and adds them to this data structure I have. Some of the properties are generic types.So say we have DataType(Of T) that has a .Value property of type T:
Dim properties = GetType(MyType).GetFields(Reflection.BindingFlags.Public Or _
Reflection.BindingFlags.Instance)
For Each prop As fieldinfo In properties
Collection.Add(prop.Name,prop.GetValue(poco))
Next
In the collection.Add for primitive types (Integer, String, etc....) I just want to add the type... but in the case of generic I want to add the DataType(Of T).Value. I hope there is some work-around but I don't think there is a way because the type of T can not be determined at compile time right? Ideally DirectCast(prop.getvalue(poco), DataType(Of T)).Value would be possible. This is when you hoped even more dynamics appear than whats in .NET 4.0.
I have a mutable class that I'm using as a key to a generic dictionary. Two keys should be equal only if their references are equal. From what I've read, in this case, I don't need to override Equals, GetHashCode , or implement IEqualityComparer.
View 5 RepliesI am looking into generics in .NET, and was wondering about the where T : struct constraint. I understand that this allows you to restrict the type used to be a value type. My question is, without any type constraint, you can do a limited number of operations on T. Do you gain the ability to use any additional operations when you specify where T : struct, or is the only value in restricting the types you can pass in?
I guess the question I am actually asking is that if I were to write, (in a discussion about how to use generics), "Now that you have constrained the type argument to value types, you can also do _________ on/with objects of that type", Is there anything to put in that blank? I can think of things for the other constraints, but not this one.
In VB.NET 2010, how to return a boolean value as generic type without compile warning?
View 2 Replies