Generic Collection Pattern

[Brian Richards]

Without generics generally I'd dervie from CollectionBase to create typed
collections. Generics mostly fill in this gap except that there are no
virtual methods on List<T> so we can no longer notify other object when a
collection changes during add, remove and set operations. I was curious how
Others were getting around this problem? I thought of doing something like:

class MyCollection : IList<T>, ICollection<T>
{
private List<T> m_list;
}

Then simply operate on m_list for each of the implementation of the
interfaces. I feel like there's a simpler solution out there that I'm not
seeing.

Thanks

[Joanna Carter [TeamB]]

"Brian Richards" <br*******@gmai l.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
OW************* *@TK2MSFTNGP05. phx.gbl...

| Without generics generally I'd dervie from CollectionBase to create typed
| collections. Generics mostly fill in this gap except that there are no
| virtual methods on List<T> so we can no longer notify other object when a
| collection changes during add, remove and set operations. I was curious
how
| Others were getting around this problem? I thought of doing something
like:

Take a look at BindingList<T>.

Joanna

--
Joanna Carter [TeamB]
Consultant Software Engineer

[Brian Richards]

Thanks! Looks like what I was looking for.

-Brian

"Joanna Carter [TeamB]" <jo****@not.for .spam> wrote in message
news:uz******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...

"Brian Richards" <br*******@gmai l.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
OW************* *@TK2MSFTNGP05. phx.gbl...

| Without generics generally I'd dervie from CollectionBase to create typed | collections. Generics mostly fill in this gap except that there are no
| virtual methods on List<T> so we can no longer notify other object when a | collection changes during add, remove and set operations. I was curious
how
| Others were getting around this problem? I thought of doing something
like:

Take a look at BindingList<T>.

Joanna

--
Joanna Carter [TeamB]
Consultant Software Engineer

[Larry Lard]

Brian Richards wrote:

Without generics generally I'd dervie from CollectionBase to create typed
collections. Generics mostly fill in this gap except that there are no
virtual methods on List<T> so we can no longer notify other object when a
collection changes during add, remove and set operations. I was curious how
Others were getting around this problem?

I asked a similar question here: <http://tinyurl.com/lntcp>

--
Larry Lard
Replies to group please

[Kevin Spencer]

Just hide the base class's method with the new operator. Example (from a
class the inherits System.Collecti ons.Generic.Dic tionary):

new virtual public void Add(string key, T value)
{
base.Add(key, value);
// add an event here if you wish.
}

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
Professional Development Numbskull

Abnormality is anything but average.

"Brian Richards" <br*******@gmai l.com> wrote in message
news:OW******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...

Without generics generally I'd dervie from CollectionBase to create typed
collections. Generics mostly fill in this gap except that there are no
virtual methods on List<T> so we can no longer notify other object when a
collection changes during add, remove and set operations. I was curious
how
Others were getting around this problem? I thought of doing something
like:

class MyCollection : IList<T>, ICollection<T>
{
private List<T> m_list;
}

Then simply operate on m_list for each of the implementation of the
interfaces. I feel like there's a simpler solution out there that I'm not
seeing.

Thanks

[Marc Gravell]

That's not such a hot idea if you intend passing the container around cast
as an interface or as an instance of the base class; if you can't override,
then you can /only/ change the behaviour when code knows the object /as/ the
new class. Personally I wouldn't advise this.

Marc