C#•2y ago

❔ How can I avoid supplying redundant generic type arguments in this case.

interface IDataStructure<ItemType, LocatorType> {...}

Class MyStringArray: IDataStructure<string, int> {...}

Class Effect<D, I, L> where D : IDataStructure<I,L> {...}

new Effect<MyStringArray, string, int>();

interface IDataStructure<ItemType, LocatorType> {...}

Class MyStringArray: IDataStructure<string, int> {...}

Class Effect<D, I, L> where D : IDataStructure<I,L> {...}

new Effect<MyStringArray, string, int>();

This is what I currently have. To give some context, I have a number of custom data structures (implementing IDataStructure) and I would like Effect to be a generic class that can operate on any of them. However, I need access to the Item and Locator types of the data structure within the Effect class. The above code works however the I and L type arguments are essentially redundant since they can be inferred from D. I would like something like class Effect<D<I,L>> where D : IDataStructure<I,L> { } (which doesn't compile) so that I can do `new Effect<MyStringArray>()' (only specifying one generic type argument but having access to the Item and Locator types within the Effect class).

3 Replies

Aaron•2y ago

the way to do this while preserving the types and without the repeated generic would be associated types, but those don't exist in C# yet if you're okay with the types being erased and with some boxing, you can have a non-generic version of IDataStructure<I, L> that exposes the same properties as objects, then constrain to that interface instead otherwise you just have to keep the generics I think

The Orange Tea FrogOP•2y ago

Thanks 👍

Accord•2y ago

Was this issue resolved? If so, run /close - otherwise I will mark this as stale and this post will be archived until there is new activity.

Gaming

Programming

❔ How can I avoid supplying redundant generic type arguments in this case.