Dictionary Object name/value pair

[Dave Young]

I'm trying to replicate the behaviour of the Commerce.Dictio nary object that
was found in Commerce Server 3.0

By using a hashtable or creating a custom class that implements IDictionary,
you have to add elements by using the following syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Add("key","va lue");

However, the old Commerce Server Dictionary object used the following
syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Name = "Fred"

In this instance, the dictionary object creates a new element key called
"Name" and assigns the value of "Fred" to it.

Any thoughts on how to replicate this?

[VJ]

What are probably looking to do is create a Dictionary Object and then a
Collection of Dictionary Object, so more like

Public class MyDictObj
{
// has member name
}

public class CMyDictObj : CollectionBase
{
// represents collection of MyDictObj
}

HTH
VJ

"Dave Young" <da************ ***@softwarespe ctrum.comwrote in message
news:OB******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP02.phx.gbl...

I'm trying to replicate the behaviour of the Commerce.Dictio nary object
that was found in Commerce Server 3.0

By using a hashtable or creating a custom class that implements
IDictionary, you have to add elements by using the following syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Add("key","va lue");

However, the old Commerce Server Dictionary object used the following
syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Name = "Fred"

In this instance, the dictionary object creates a new element key called
"Name" and assigns the value of "Fred" to it.

Any thoughts on how to replicate this?

[Simon Tamman]

It's not perfect, but you could use an indexer to reduce the amount of
modification.

private Dictionary<stri ng, stringhash = new Dictionary<stri ng, string>();

public string this[string key]
{
get
{
return hash[key];
}
set
{
hash[key] = value;
}
}

Which means that instead of:

DictionaryObjec t.Name = "Fred"

you do:

DictionaryObjec t["Name"] = "Fred";

I think it's not possible to dynamically create properties as C# is a
statically typed language and you will get a compiler error if the property
you are asking for does not exist.

If you REALLY want it to work like this and don't care about bloat you could
write a codeGen to create a class file with every single alphabetical
combination created as a property.
As an example of A:

public string A
{
get
{
return hash["A"];
}
set
{
hash["A"] = value;
}
}

But that would be a seriously LONG file.

HTH

Simon

"Dave Young" <da************ ***@softwarespe ctrum.comwrote in message
news:OB******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP02.phx.gbl...

I'm trying to replicate the behaviour of the Commerce.Dictio nary object

that

was found in Commerce Server 3.0

By using a hashtable or creating a custom class that implements

IDictionary,

you have to add elements by using the following syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Add("key","va lue");

However, the old Commerce Server Dictionary object used the following
syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Name = "Fred"

In this instance, the dictionary object creates a new element key called
"Name" and assigns the value of "Fred" to it.

Any thoughts on how to replicate this?

[Todos Menos [MSFT]]

I don't really understand the point.

Can't you just use a database?

Is SQL Server more complex than this?

-Todos

On Mar 13, 11:16 am, "Dave Young"
<dave.young.nos ...@softwarespe ctrum.comwrote:

I'm trying to replicate the behaviour of the Commerce.Dictio nary object that
was found in Commerce Server 3.0

By using a hashtable or creating a custom class that implements IDictionary,
you have to add elements by using the following syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Add("key","va lue");

However, the old Commerce Server Dictionary object used the following
syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Name = "Fred"

In this instance, the dictionary object creates a new element key called
"Name" and assigns the value of "Fred" to it.

Any thoughts on how to replicate this?

[Bruce Wood]

I believe that the OP is asking about an in-memory data structure, not
a long-term storage option.

On Mar 13, 1:49 pm, "Todos Menos [MSFT]"
<todos_menos_m. [e-mail] rote:

I don't really understand the point.

Can't you just use a database?

Is SQL Server more complex than this?

-Todos

On Mar 13, 11:16 am, "Dave Young"

<dave.young.nos ...@softwarespe ctrum.comwrote:

I'm trying to replicate the behaviour of the Commerce.Dictio nary object that
was found in Commerce Server 3.0

By using a hashtable or creating a custom class that implements IDictionary,
you have to add elements by using the following syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Add("key","va lue");

However, the old Commerce Server Dictionary object used the following
syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Name = "Fred"

In this instance, the dictionary object creates a new element key called
"Name" and assigns the value of "Fred" to it.

Any thoughts on how to replicate this?

[Simon Tamman]

I "think" he's trying to prop up existing code by re-writing this library.
If the API changes then more code needs to be re-written.
That's why I think he's not using a database.

I could be wrong though, if that's the case then you're right a database is
definately the best course of action. Because trying to create a dynamic
type in a statically typed language is like putting a square peg in a round
hole.
"Todos Menos [MSFT]" <to************ **@hotmail.comw rote in message
news:11******** *************@b 75g2000hsg.goog legroups.com...

I don't really understand the point.

Can't you just use a database?

Is SQL Server more complex than this?

-Todos

On Mar 13, 11:16 am, "Dave Young"
<dave.young.nos ...@softwarespe ctrum.comwrote:

I'm trying to replicate the behaviour of the Commerce.Dictio nary object

that

was found in Commerce Server 3.0

By using a hashtable or creating a custom class that implements

IDictionary,

you have to add elements by using the following syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Add("key","va lue");

However, the old Commerce Server Dictionary object used the following
syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Name = "Fred"

In this instance, the dictionary object creates a new element key called
"Name" and assigns the value of "Fred" to it.

Any thoughts on how to replicate this?

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Simon Tamman <i_************ *************** *******@NOSPAMh otmail.com>
wrote:

I "think" he's trying to prop up existing code by re-writing this library.
If the API changes then more code needs to be re-written.
That's why I think he's not using a database.

I could be wrong though, if that's the case then you're right a database is
definately the best course of action. Because trying to create a dynamic
type in a statically typed language is like putting a square peg in a round
hole.

"Todos" isn't trying to make serious points - he's just trolling. Best
to ignore.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Simon Tamman]

Thanks for the tip. :D

No chance I could get your opinion on my wierd bug I posted yesterday is
there?
I did include a "short but complete" example to demonstrate the problem. :D

"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.co mwrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@msnews.micros oft.com...

Simon Tamman <i_************ *************** *******@NOSPAMh otmail.com>
wrote:

I "think" he's trying to prop up existing code by re-writing this

library.

If the API changes then more code needs to be re-written.
That's why I think he's not using a database.

I could be wrong though, if that's the case then you're right a database

is

definately the best course of action. Because trying to create a dynamic
type in a statically typed language is like putting a square peg in a

round

hole.

"Todos" isn't trying to make serious points - he's just trolling. Best
to ignore.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[aaron.kempf]

I just think that we should be teaching these Newbies about DATABASES
and not all this ADO.net and XML _CRAP_

that is why we outsource all this crap to india-- because there aren't
enough kids in the good old USA that know how to speak SQL



On Mar 13, 2:00 pm, "Bruce Wood" <brucew...@cana da.comwrote:

I believe that the OP is asking about an in-memory data structure, not
a long-term storage option.

On Mar 13, 1:49 pm, "Todos Menos[MSFT]"

<todos_menos_m. [e-mail] rote:

I don't really understand the point.

Can't you just use a database?

Is SQL Server more complex than this?

-Todos

On Mar 13, 11:16 am, "Dave Young"

<dave.young.nos ...@softwarespe ctrum.comwrote:

I'm trying to replicate the behaviour of the Commerce.Dictio nary object that
was found in Commerce Server 3.0

By using a hashtable or creating a custom class that implements IDictionary,
you have to add elements by using the following syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Add("key","va lue");

However, the old Commerce Server Dictionary object used the following
syntax.

DictionaryObjec t.Name = "Fred"

In this instance, the dictionary object creates a new element key called
"Name" and assigns the value of "Fred" to it.

Any thoughts on how to replicate this?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Simon Tamman <i_************ *************** *******@NOSPAMh otmail.com>
wrote:

Thanks for the tip. :D

No chance I could get your opinion on my wierd bug I posted yesterday is
there?
I did include a "short but complete" example to demonstrate the problem. :D

Unfortunately I don't know a lot about the details of Windows Forms.
Have you asked in the Windows Forms newsgroup?

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too