Generic, Delegate, void

[Aquila Deus]

Hi all!

I found a problem when using generic with delegate:

delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT> ();
delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT, AT0> (AT0 a0);
delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT, AT0, AT1> (AT0 a0, AT1 at1);
delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT, AT0, AT1, AT2> (AT0 a0, AT1 at1, AT2
at2);

The definition is fine, but:

MethodTemplate<void> someAnonymousMethod = delegate () { .... };

gives me """ Keyword 'void' cannot be used in this context """
I know void is not a type, but isn't this inconsistent??

[Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]]

Aquila,

Why is it inconsistent? Why would you expect that you can use void with
this? It kind of doesn't make sense to be able to pass void to a Generic,
because you could have easily written the class/method without the Generic
parmameter in order to indicate void is being passed.

What are you trying to do?
--
- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]
- mv*@spam.guard.caspershouse.com

"Aquila Deus" <aq*********@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:11**********************@c13g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...

Hi all!

I found a problem when using generic with delegate:

delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT> ();
delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT, AT0> (AT0 a0);
delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT, AT0, AT1> (AT0 a0, AT1 at1);
delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT, AT0, AT1, AT2> (AT0 a0, AT1 at1, AT2
at2);

The definition is fine, but:

MethodTemplate<void> someAnonymousMethod = delegate () { .... };

gives me """ Keyword 'void' cannot be used in this context """
I know void is not a type, but isn't this inconsistent??

[Aquila Deus]

Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] wrote:

Aquila,

Why is it inconsistent? Why would you expect that you can use void with this? It kind of doesn't make sense to be able to pass void to a Generic, because you could have easily written the class/method without the Generic parmameter in order to indicate void is being passed.

What are you trying to do?
What I want is a set of general generic delegates so that I can easily
declare anonymous functions and use delegates in object members and
function parameters.

Without void in generics I have to give generic delegate/function that
returns void a different name.



--
- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]
- mv*@spam.guard.caspershouse.com

"Aquila Deus" <aq*********@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:11**********************@c13g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...

Hi all!

I found a problem when using generic with delegate:

delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT> ();
delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT, AT0> (AT0 a0);
delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT, AT0, AT1> (AT0 a0, AT1 at1);
delegate RT MethodTemplate <RT, AT0, AT1, AT2> (AT0 a0, AT1 at1, AT2 at2);

The definition is fine, but:

MethodTemplate<void> someAnonymousMethod = delegate () { .... };

gives me """ Keyword 'void' cannot be used in this context """
I know void is not a type, but isn't this inconsistent??

[Aquila Deus]

Aquila Deus wrote:

Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] wrote:

Aquila,

Why is it inconsistent? Why would you expect that you can use void with

this? It kind of doesn't make sense to be able to pass void to a

Generic,

because you could have easily written the class/method without the

Generic

parmameter in order to indicate void is being passed.

What are you trying to do?

What I want is a set of general generic delegates so that I can

easily declare anonymous functions and use delegates in object members and
function parameters.

Without void in generics I have to give generic delegate/function that returns void a different name.

For example, you can use:
someEvent += new MethodTemplate<object, EventArgs>(myEventHandler);
instead of:
someEvent += new EventHandler(myEventHandler);
which requires you declare a new delegate type for each set of function
parameters and return types.