CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c#dictionarycollectionscovariance
bpeikes
bpeikes

Reputation: 3715

Make dictionary read only in C#

I have a Dictionary<string, List<string>> and would like to expose the member as read only. I see that I can return it as a IReadOnlyDictionary<string, List<string>>, but I can't figure out how to return it as an IReadOnlyDictionary<string, IReadOnlyList<string>>.

Is there a way to do this? In C++ I'd just be using const, but C# doesn't have that.

Note that simply using a IReadOnlyDictionary does not help in this case, because I want the values to be read only as well. It appears the only way to do this is build another IReadOnlyDictionary, and add IReadOnlyList to them.

Another option, which I wouldn't be thrilled with, would be to create wrapper which implements the interface IReadOnlyDictionary<string, IReadOnlyList<string>>, and have it hold a copy of the original instance, but that seems overkill.

Upvotes: 40

Views: 77181

Answers (7)

Vivek Nuna
Vivek Nuna

Reputation: 1

Not directly answering the question, but .NET 8 introduces FrozenDictionary.

The new System.Collections.Frozen namespace includes the collection types FrozenDictionary<TKey,TValue> and FrozenSet<T>. These types don't allow any changes to keys and values once a collection is created. That requirement allows faster read operations (for example, TryGetValue()). These types are particularly useful for collections that are populated on first use and then persisted for the duration of a long-lived service, for example:

Upvotes: 5

Mat&#237;as Fidemraizer
Mat&#237;as Fidemraizer

Reputation: 64943

It would be as easy as casting the whole dictionary reference to IReadOnlyDictionary<string, IReadOnlyList<string>> because Dictionary<TKey, TValue> implements IReadOnlyDictionary<TKey, TValue>.

BTW, you can't do that because you want the List<string> values as IReadOnlyList<string>.

So you need something like this:

var readOnlyDict = (IReadOnlyDictionary<string, IReadOnlyList<string>>)dict
                        .ToDictionary(pair => pair.Key, pair => pair.Value.AsReadOnly());

Immutable dictionaries

This is just a suggestion, but if you're looking for immutable dictionaries, add System.Collections.Immutable NuGet package to your solution and you'll be able to use them:

// ImmutableDictionary<string, ImmutableList<string>>
var immutableDict = dict
           .ToImmutableDictionary(pair => pair.Key, pair => pair.Value.ToImmutableList());

Learn more about Immutable Collections here.

Upvotes: 41

RCP161
RCP161

Reputation: 239

I run into the same problem. I solved it on the following way. 

List<string> list = new List<string>();

Dictionary<string, IReadOnlyCollection<string>> dic = new Dictionary<string, IReadOnlyCollection<string>>();

IReadOnlyDictionary<string, IReadOnlyCollection<string>> dicRo = new ReadOnlyDictionary<string, IReadOnlyCollection<string>>(dic);

 list.Add("Test1");

 dic["T"] = list.AsReadOnly();

 ist.Add("Test2");

This has the positiv effekt, that you

  • can still add items to the list
  • can still add items to the dictionary
  • can't edit the ReadOnlyDictionary
  • can't edit the ReadOnlyCollection
  • can't cast it into a Dictionary
  • can't cast it into a List
  • have your ReadOnlyDictionary always up to date

Maybe this will help someone.

Upvotes: 4

Heinzi
Heinzi

Reputation: 172478

First, you'll have to create a new dictionary with the desired content types:

var dicWithReadOnlyList = dic.ToDictionary(
    kv => kv.Key,
    kv => kv.Value.AsReadOnly());

Then you can just return the new dictionary, since IReadOnlyDictionary is a supertype of Dictionary.

Why do you need to do that? Because Dictionary<T, A> is not a supertype of Dictionary<T, B>, even if A is a supertype of B. Why? Consider the following example:

var dic = new Dictionary<T, B>();
Dictionary<T, A> dic2 = dic;      // Imagine this were possible...

dic2.Add(someT, someA);           // ...then we'd have a type violation here, since
                                  // dic2 = dic requires some B as the value.

In other words, TValue in Dictionary is not covariant. From an object-orientied point of view, covariance should be possible in the read-only version of the dictionary, but there are legacy issues in the .NET framework which prevent this (see the part starting with "UPDATE" in this question for details).

Upvotes: 3

John Bustos
John Bustos

Reputation: 19574

Given the fact that you're specifically looking for a read-only Dictionary<string, List<string>>, you're basically looking exactly for a Lookup.

The Dictionary object has a ToLookup() extension.

Upvotes: 9

Patrick Huber
Patrick Huber

Reputation: 756

If you want to return a read only dictionary but still be able to mutate the dictionary and list in your class you could use casting to get back the list type.

This example is a bit contrived, but shows how it could work. 

public class MyClass
{
    Dictionary<string, IReadOnlyList<string>> _dictionary;
    public IReadOnlyDictionary<string, IReadOnlyList<string>> Dictionary { get { return _dictionary; } }

    public MyClass()
    {
        _dictionary = new Dictionary<string, IReadOnlyList<string>>();
    }

    public void AddItem(string item)
    {
        IReadOnlyList<string> readOnlyList = null;
        List<string> list = null;
        if (!_dictionary.TryGetValue(item, out readOnlyList))
        {
            list = new List<string>();
            _dictionary.Add(item, list);
        }
        else
            list = readOnlyList as List<string>;
        list.Add(item);
    }
}

If you goal is to have the property be immutable, then using a ReadOnlyDictionary would be the best option.

Upvotes: 0

TheNoob
TheNoob

Reputation: 929

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/acdd6hb7.aspx

You can use this to expose the object as readonly.

You could also use properties get; set; and only allow the get to be public.

But Matias answer seems to be more fitting.

Upvotes: -3

Related Questions