how to combine two arrays

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andrus
  • Start date Start date
A

Andrus

I have class

public class Base {
protected virtual string[] RequiredFields
{
get { return new string[] { "field1"}; }
}
}


I need to add some new string to base class sting in overridden method.

I tried

class Konto : Base
{
protected override string[] RequiredFields
{
get
{
return base.RequiredFields + new string[] { "field2"} ;
}
}
}

but got error.
How to return both base class strings and new added strings in child class
so that array { "field1", "field2" } is returned ?

Andrus.
 
Andrus said:
[...]
class Konto : Base
{
protected override string[] RequiredFields
{
get
{
return base.RequiredFields + new string[] { "field2"} ;
}
}
}

but got error.
How to return both base class strings and new added strings in child
class so that array { "field1", "field2" } is returned ?
Click to expand...

Implement the concatenate using supported operations, rather than
made-up ones. :) For example:

override string[] RequiredFields
{
get
{
string[] rgstrBase = base.RequiredFields,
rgstrThis = { "field2" },
rgstrAll = new string[rgstrBase.Length + rgstrThis.Length];

rgstrBase.CopyTo(rgstrAll, 0);
rgstrBase.CopyTo(rgstrAll, rgstrBase.Length);
return rgstrAll;
}
}

You may want to refactor the concatenation into a helper method (e.g.
extension method, static method in the base class, etc.) so that
subclasses only have to provide their specific field array, rather than
copying the concatenation code over and over.

Pete
 
Pete,
Implement the concatenate using supported operations, rather than made-up
ones. :) For example:

override string[] RequiredFields
{
get
{
string[] rgstrBase = base.RequiredFields,
rgstrThis = { "field2" },
rgstrAll = new string[rgstrBase.Length +
rgstrThis.Length];

rgstrBase.CopyTo(rgstrAll, 0);
rgstrBase.CopyTo(rgstrAll, rgstrBase.Length);
return rgstrAll;
}
}

You may want to refactor the concatenation into a helper method (e.g.
extension method, static method in the base class, etc.) so that
subclasses only have to provide their specific field array, rather than
copying the concatenation code over and over.
Click to expand...

I expected singe line command in every subclass.
This code looks too complicated and difficult to read.
If this makes things simpler I can change string[] type to something other,
eq. IList<string> ?
Or how to implement this in base class only ?

Andrus.
 
Andrus said:
Pete,
Implement the concatenate using supported operations, rather than
made-up ones. :) For example:

override string[] RequiredFields
{
get
{
string[] rgstrBase = base.RequiredFields,
rgstrThis = { "field2" },
rgstrAll = new string[rgstrBase.Length +
rgstrThis.Length];

rgstrBase.CopyTo(rgstrAll, 0);
rgstrBase.CopyTo(rgstrAll, rgstrBase.Length);
return rgstrAll;
}
}

You may want to refactor the concatenation into a helper method (e.g.
extension method, static method in the base class, etc.) so that
subclasses only have to provide their specific field array, rather
than copying the concatenation code over and over.
Click to expand...

I expected singe line command in every subclass.
Click to expand...

Do you mean "single"? Why did you expect that?
This code looks too complicated and difficult to read.
Click to expand...

Feel free to make it simpler and easier to read, if you can.
If this makes things simpler I can change string[] type to something
other, eq. IList<string> ?
Click to expand...

then you can use said:
Or how to implement this in base class only ?
Click to expand...

As I mentioned, you could move all the code that does the real work into
a single helper method, so that each sub-class only needs to call that
one method. This would be similar to using the Enumerable.Concat<T>()
extension method, except it would be your own method, specific to
whatever data type it is you want to support (e.g. string[]).

Depending on your exact needs, it may be that doing this using a virtual
class member isn't the best way anyway. If you can use the specific
type name, it might make more sense to do it as a static member, using
the static constructor. For example:

class Base
{
private static IEnumerable<string> _rgstrFields =
new string[] { "field1" };

public static IEnumerable<string> RequiredFields
{
get { return _rgstrFields; }
}
}

class Derived : Base
{
private static IEnumerable<string> _rgstrFields;

static Derived()
{
_rgstrFields = Base.RequiredFields.Concat(new string[] {
"field2" });
}

public static IEnumerable<string> RequiredFields
{
get { return _rgstrFields; }
}
}

Alternatively, if you really need the polymorphic behavior, use the same
static initialization, but make the RequiredFields property a virtual
instance member that just returns the value of the class's own static
member.

The above suggestion requires explicitly naming the base class in the
static constructor of derived classes, which I don't think is all that
bad. You can avoid that with more complicated initialization techniques
(e.g. type-based dictionary), but IMHO simpler is better.

Pete
 
Andrus said:
I have class

public class Base {
protected virtual string[] RequiredFields
{
get { return new string[] { "field1"}; }
}
}


I need to add some new string to base class sting in overridden method.

I tried

class Konto : Base
{
protected override string[] RequiredFields
{
get
{
return base.RequiredFields + new string[] { "field2"} ;
}
}
}

but got error.
How to return both base class strings and new added strings in child
class so that array { "field1", "field2" } is returned ?
Click to expand...

If you are on .NET 3.5, then

return base.RequiredFields.Concat(new string[] { "field2"}).ToArray();

may be the shortest code.

shortest != fastest

Arne
 
Back
Top