C
C#•3mo ago
Lounder

How terrible is this Result implementation?

public class SuccessResult : Result
{
    public object? Data { get; protected set; }

    internal SuccessResult(int statusCode, object? data)
        : base(statusCode, true)
    {
        this.Data = data;
    }
}

public class SuccessResult<T> : SuccessResult
{
    public new T? Data
    {
        get => (T?)base.Data;
        private set => base.Data = value;
    }

    internal SuccessResult(int statusCode, T? data)
        : base(statusCode, data)
    {
    }
}
public class SuccessResult : Result
{
    public object? Data { get; protected set; }

    internal SuccessResult(int statusCode, object? data)
        : base(statusCode, true)
    {
        this.Data = data;
    }
}

public class SuccessResult<T> : SuccessResult
{
    public new T? Data
    {
        get => (T?)base.Data;
        private set => base.Data = value;
    }

    internal SuccessResult(int statusCode, T? data)
        : base(statusCode, data)
    {
    }
}
5 Replies
Lounder
LounderOP•3mo ago
Is it absolutely wrong to do it like so? I'll be using this instead 
    public class SuccessResult<T> : Result, ISuccessResult
    {
        public object? DataObject => this.Data;

        public T? Data { get; private set; }

        internal SuccessResult(int statusCode, T? data)
            : base(statusCode, true)
        {
            this.Data = data;
        }
    }
    public class SuccessResult<T> : Result, ISuccessResult
    {
        public object? DataObject => this.Data;

        public T? Data { get; private set; }

        internal SuccessResult(int statusCode, T? data)
            : base(statusCode, true)
        {
            this.Data = data;
        }
    }
Sossenbinder
Sossenbinder•3mo ago
The first version is definitely not ideal, you have a shadowed property, and this would also be prone to boxing in case T is a value type Second option definitely looks better Although I'm not sure when you would need an object as the Data opposed to the T itself There's a bunch of result implementations out there you can just use as well
Lounder
LounderOP•3mo ago
        public static ActionResult ToActionResult(this Result result)
        {
            var httpCodes = Enum.GetValues(typeof(HttpStatusCode)).Cast<int>();

            int? httpStatusCode = httpCodes.Contains(result.StatusCode) ? result.StatusCode : null;

            if (result is ISuccessResult successResult)
            {
                object injectedObject = InjectAppStatusInObject(successResult.DataObject, successResult.StatusCode);

                return new JsonResult(injectedObject)
                {
                    StatusCode = httpStatusCode ?? (int)HttpStatusCode.OK
                };
            }
...
        public static ActionResult ToActionResult(this Result result)
        {
            var httpCodes = Enum.GetValues(typeof(HttpStatusCode)).Cast<int>();

            int? httpStatusCode = httpCodes.Contains(result.StatusCode) ? result.StatusCode : null;

            if (result is ISuccessResult successResult)
            {
                object injectedObject = InjectAppStatusInObject(successResult.DataObject, successResult.StatusCode);

                return new JsonResult(injectedObject)
                {
                    StatusCode = httpStatusCode ?? (int)HttpStatusCode.OK
                };
            }
...
I need the object so I can return the Data itself In this result.ToActionResult() method, I dont know <T>
Sossenbinder
Sossenbinder•3mo ago
But you could create an extension method on Result<T>, transforming it into an ActionResult<T>
Lounder
LounderOP•3mo ago
Honestly I just scrapped the whole thing hahahah Im just using a very barebones result right now I will rework it later on

Did you find this page helpful?