CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c#
Danvil
Danvil

Reputation: 23031

Specific types in implementing class when using an interface

Consider the following code sample:

interface IData {
  int Count();
}

interface IOperations {
  IData Foo();
  double Bar(IData a);
}

class Data1 : IData {
  public int Count() { return 37; }
  public double SomethingElse { get; set; }
}

class Ops1 : IOperations 
{
  public Data1 Foo() { return new Data1(); } // want to return specific type here
  public double Bar(Data1 x) { ... } // want to get specific type here
                                     // and not use operator as everywhere
}

// more definitions of classes Data2, Ops2, Data3, Ops3, ...

// some code:
Ops1 a = new Ops1();
Data1 data = a.Foo(); // want Data1 here not IData!
double x = a.Bar(data);

I could of course just use public IData Foo() { return new Data1(); }:

// some code
Ops1 a = new Ops1();
Data1 data = a.Foo() as Data1;

but with as everywhere, the code is quickly becoming confusing.

I wonder if there is a good design pattern to achieve this in a clear and strong way?

Edit: Is is important, that Ops and Data share a common base class:

List<IOperations> ops = ...;
List<IData> data = ...;
List<double> result = ...;
for(int i=0; i<ops.Count; i++) 
  result[i] = ops[i].Bar(data[i]);

So for the case with the return type, I wonder that this is forbidden, because I satisfy the requirement of the interface. In the case with parameters probably there is some additional (template) layer required.

Upvotes: 3

Views: 99

Answers (1)

Mark Byers
Mark Byers

Reputation: 839194

You could use generics:

interface IOperations<T> where T: IData
{ 
  T Foo();
  double Bar(T a);
}

class Ops1 : IOperations<Data1>
{
    public Data1 Foo() { return new Data1(); }
    public double Bar(Data1 x) { /* ... */  } 
}

Upvotes: 5

Related Questions