ChatGPT解决这个技术问题 Extra ChatGPT

How do I make the return type of a method generic?

Is there a way to make this method generic so I can return a string, bool, int, or double? Right now, it's returning a string, but if it's able find "true" or "false" as the configuration value, I'd like to return a bool for example.

    public static string ConfigSetting(string settingName)
    {  
         return ConfigurationManager.AppSettings[settingName];
    }
Is there a way for you to know what type each settings is?
I think the question you really want to ask is "How do I make my application config strongly-typed?" It's been too long since I worked with that to write a proper answer, though.
Yah, ideally I don't want to have to pass the type into the method. I'm only going to have the 4 types I mentioned. So if "true"/"false" is set, I want this function to return a boolean (without needing to pass it into the method), I can probably combine int and double into just double, and everything else should be a string. What is answered already will work fine, but I need to pass the type every time, which is probably fine.
Your comment sounds like you're asking for a method that will return a strongly-typed bool (or string, or int, or what have you) at runtime based on the actual data retrieved for the setting name key. C# won't do that for you; there's no way you can know the type of that value at compile time. In other words, that's dynamic typing, not static typing. C# can do that for you if you use the dynamic keyword. There's a performance cost for that, but for reading a config file, the performance cost is almost certainly insignificant.

J
Jon Skeet

You need to make it a generic method, like this:

public static T ConfigSetting<T>(string settingName)
{  
    return /* code to convert the setting to T... */
}

But the caller will have to specify the type they expect. You could then potentially use Convert.ChangeType, assuming that all the relevant types are supported:

public static T ConfigSetting<T>(string settingName)
{  
    object value = ConfigurationManager.AppSettings[settingName];
    return (T) Convert.ChangeType(value, typeof(T));
}

I'm not entirely convinced that all this is a good idea, mind you...


/* code to convert the setting to T... */ and here follows the entire novel :)
Would this not require you to know the type of the setting you wish to get, which may not be possible.
@thecoshman: It would, but if you didn't then what you do with the returned value?
While this answer is of course correct, and as you note satisfies the OP's request, it's probably worth mentioning that the old approach of separate methods (ConfigSettingString, ConfigSettingBool, etc.) has the advantage of method bodies that will be shorter, clearer, and better focused.
If this is not recommended then what is the purpose of generic return types?
B
BrokenGlass

You could use Convert.ChangeType():

public static T ConfigSetting<T>(string settingName)
{
    return (T)Convert.ChangeType(ConfigurationManager.AppSettings[settingName], typeof(T));
}

R
RollerCosta

There are many ways of doing this(listed by priority, specific to the OP's problem)

Option 1: Straight approach - Create multiple functions for each type you expect rather than having one generic function. public static bool ConfigSettingInt(string settingName) { return Convert.ToBoolean(ConfigurationManager.AppSettings[settingName]); } Option 2: When you don't want to use fancy methods of conversion - Cast the value to object and then to generic type. public static T ConfigSetting(string settingName) { return (T)(object)ConfigurationManager.AppSettings[settingName]; } Note - This will throw an error if the cast is not valid(your case). I would not recommend doing this if you are not sure about the type casting, rather go for option 3. Option 3: Generic with type safety - Create a generic function to handle type conversion. public static T ConvertValue(U value) where U : IConvertible { return (T)Convert.ChangeType(value, typeof(T)); } Note - T is the expected type, note the where constraint here(type of U must be IConvertible to save us from the errors)


Why make the third option generic in U? There's no point in doing so, and it makes the method harder to call. Just accept IConvertible instead. I don't think it's worth including the second option for this question given that it doesn't answer the question being asked. You should probably also rename the method in the first option...
V
Vinay Chanumolu

You have to convert the type of your return value of the method to the Generic type which you pass to the method during calling.

    public static T values<T>()
    {
        Random random = new Random();
        int number = random.Next(1, 4);
        return (T)Convert.ChangeType(number, typeof(T));
    }

You need pass a type that is type casteable for the value you return through that method.

If you would want to return a value which is not type casteable to the generic type you pass, you might have to alter the code or make sure you pass a type that is casteable for the return value of method. So, this approach is not reccomended.


Spot on - for me the last line return (T)Convert.ChangeType(number, typeof(T)); was exactly what I was missing - cheers
P
Prabhakar

Create a function and pass out put parameter as of generic type.

 public static T some_function<T>(T out_put_object /*declare as Output object*/)
    {
        return out_put_object;
    }

This is actually pretty smart for a few use-cases. Like pulling data out of a database. You know you will get a list of data of type T. The loading method just does not know what type of T you want right NOW. So just pass a new List to this and the method can do it's job and fill the list before returning it. Nice!
S
Sid

Please try below code :

public T? GetParsedOrDefaultValue<T>(string valueToParse) where T : struct, IComparable
{
 if(string.EmptyOrNull(valueToParse))return null;
  try
  {
     // return parsed value
     return (T) Convert.ChangeType(valueToParse, typeof(T));
  }
  catch(Exception)
  {
   //default as null value
   return null;
  }
 return null;
}

A
Adam Howard
 private static T[] prepareArray<T>(T[] arrayToCopy, T value)
    {
        Array.Copy(arrayToCopy, 1, arrayToCopy, 0, arrayToCopy.Length - 1);
        arrayToCopy[arrayToCopy.Length - 1] = value;
        return (T[])arrayToCopy;
    }

I was performing this throughout my code and wanted a way to put it into a method. I wanted to share this here because I didn't have to use the Convert.ChangeType for my return value. This may not be a best practice but it worked for me. This method takes in an array of generic type and a value to add to the end of the array. The array is then copied with the first value stripped and the value taken into the method is added to the end of the array. The last thing is that I return the generic array.