Re: foreach pretty useless for composite classes, don't ya thunk?

[Peter Morris]

I am not sure what you are asking. You seem to be asking how to implement a
plain IEnumerable on a composite structure, but then your example shows a
flat structure using "yield". Your subject makes me infer that you think
foreach is enirely useless for composite structures.

I will address the subject text, because that makes the most sense to me :-)
Take the following class

public class MyTreeNode : IEnumerable<MyT reeNode>
{
public readonly List<MyTreeNode ChildNodes = new List<MyTreeNode >();
public readonly string Name;
public MyTreeNode ParentNode { get; private set; }

public MyTreeNode(MyTr eeNode parentNode, string name)
{
ParentNode = parentNode;
Name = name;
if (parentNode != null)
ParentNode.Chil dNodes.Add(this );
}

public string FullName
{
get
{
if (ParentNode == null)
return Name;
else
return ParentNode.Full Name + "/" + Name;
}
}

public IEnumerator<MyT reeNodeGetEnume rator()
{
foreach (var node in ChildNodes)
{
yield return node;
foreach (var subNode in node)
yield return subNode;
}
}

IEnumerator IEnumerable.Get Enumerator()
{
return GetEnumerator() ;
}
}
}
it can be used like so....
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var tree = new MyTreeNode(null , "Root");
AddChildNodes(t ree, 1, 3);

//********
//NOTE: Foreach not being pretty useless on a composite structure
//********
foreach (var node in tree)
{
Console.WriteLi ne(node.FullNam e);
}
Console.ReadLin e();
}

static void AddChildNodes(M yTreeNode node, int level, int maxLevel)
{
string[] names = new string[] { "A", "B", "C"};
foreach (var name in names)
{
var childNode = new MyTreeNode(node , name);
if (level < maxLevel)
AddChildNodes(c hildNode, level + 1, maxLevel);
}

}
}
and it will output the following.....

Root/A
Root/A/A
Root/A/A/A
Root/A/A/B
Root/A/A/C
Root/A/B
Root/A/B/A
Root/A/B/B
Root/A/B/C
Root/A/C
Root/A/C/A
Root/A/C/B
Root/A/C/C
Root/B
Root/B/A
Root/B/A/A
Root/B/A/B
Root/B/A/C
Root/B/B
Root/B/B/A
Root/B/B/B
Root/B/B/C
Root/B/C
Root/B/C/A
Root/B/C/B
Root/B/C/C
Root/C
Root/C/A
Root/C/A/A
Root/C/A/B
Root/C/A/C
Root/C/B
Root/C/B/A
Root/C/B/B
Root/C/B/C
Root/C/C
Root/C/C/A
Root/C/C/B
Root/C/C/C
Does that prove that foreach is useful for composite structures, or have I
completely missed the point of what you were trying to say?

Regards

Pete

[raylopez99]

On Sep 20, 4:14*am, "Peter Morris" <mrpmorri...@SP AMgmail.comwrot e:

>
Does that prove that foreach is useful for composite structures, or have I
completely missed the point of what you were trying to say?

Thanks; this was a good example that I've saved to study. Seems a
couple of things are new to me (I've never seen readonly for a list,
only for primitive data like an int, but I guess it makes sense;
likewise 'var' sounds like Visual Basic but it's C#3 compliant I
think), but the main point is that for a "composite" structure (where
I take it a class contains another class as member) uses 'foreach' but
implicitly uses the properties of collections themselves for the
member variable.

To wit:

public IEnumerator<MyT reeNodeGetEnume rator()
{
foreach (var node in ChildNodes)
{
yield return node;
foreach (var subNode in node)
yield return subNode;
}
}

makes use of the property of public readonly List<MyTreeNode >
ChildNodes = new List<MyTreeNode >();
that "List" is a generic container that has its own "behind the
scenes" iterator.

However, as I type this I see that two yield returns are present, but,
I've seen this before and it's legal.

Bottom line: foreach is a useful tool, and once I study this example
more I'll have more to say perhaps, but it's not clear you are really
using 'foreach' any different from the way I currently use it: to
iterate member variables (even classes) that are parts of generic
containers (from the collections library) like List<MyTreeNode >
ChildNodes = new List<MyTreeNode >();

Or maybe that's how you are supposed to use foreach, since these
containers have 'foreach' built in, behind the scenes. Anyway more
later.

RL

[Peter Morris]

couple of things are new to me (I've never seen readonly for a list,

only for primitive data like an int, but I guess it makes sense;

Just saves its reference from changing :-)

likewise 'var' sounds like Visual Basic but it's C#3 compliant

It's just shorthand for writing the class name out twice. I only use it
where it is obvious what the type is.

>However, as I type this I see that two yield returns are present, but,
I've seen this before and it's legal.

yield return 1;
yield return 3;
yield return 5;
yield return 7;

That's legal too, but not much use :-)

>>

Bottom line: foreach is a useful tool, and once I study this example
more I'll have more to say perhaps, but it's not clear you are really
using 'foreach' any different from the way I currently use it:
<<

You *never* use "foreach" differently. "foreach" is just a language
specific way of comsuming the iterator pattern, "yield" is a language
specific way of implementing the iterator pattern. The purpose of the
iterator pattern is to allow you to get access to all *relevant* items in
turn, and not to worry about how those values are obtained. An example is
to get each word within a document for spell checking; these words are held
within various containers (a word, within a paragraph, within a cell, within
a table row, within a table, within a column, within a page, within a
document) - you wouldn't want to write code to loop through all of those,
you just want to iterate all words within the document.

>>

Or maybe that's how you are supposed to use foreach, since these
containers have 'foreach' built in, behind the scenes. Anyway more
later.
<<

Yep. As I just said above, foreach is a consumer of the iterator pattern,
nothing more.

Pete

[raylopez99]

OK, I am beginning to see now, thanks Peter Morris.

But one more thing: can you tell me how to get rid of this compiler
error?:

foreach statement cannot operate on variables of type
'IEnumerableEx0 1.Namer' because it implements multiple instantiations
of System.Collecti ons.Generic.IEn umerable<T>'; try casting to a
specific interface instantiation

See the code I will post to Family Tree Mike's reply (since it's his
code, modified).

Almost there (for me), I appreciate it.

BTW your example was good for a n-ary tree that is traversed 'depth
first' recursively rather than 'breath first', and I've put it in my
library as such; thanks again. I already have (from my own work) a
'breath first' non-recursive n-ary tree, so this complements that.

RL

Peter Morris wrote:

>
Yep. As I just said above, foreach is a consumer of the iterator pattern,
nothing more.

[Brian Gideon]

On Sep 20, 4:16*pm, raylopez99 <raylope...@yah oo.comwrote:

BTW your example was good for a n-ary tree that is traversed 'depth
first' recursively rather than 'breath first', and I've put it in my
library as such; thanks again. *I already have (from my own work) a
'breath first' non-recursive n-ary tree, so this complements that.

Exactly. And that leads to the next big advantage of the iterator/
enumerator pattern. The collection class itself encapsulates the
logic required to enumerate it's items.