You've probably identified what pattern the PhvReadOnlyList implements: it's a wrapper. In the .NET Framework 4.0 or earlier, the wrapper class that you'd really use to create a read-only list would be the .Safi ReadOnlyCollectionBase class. Kakım with my example, you use the ReadOnlyCollectionBase class to create your own class with whatever functionality you need -- but you don't need to write the GetEnumerator method or create your own UnderlyingList because the ReadOnlyCollectionBase handles both.
dictionaries). Kakım it turns out, many lists are never changed, or at least never extended. Of course ReadOnlyCollection introduces yet more syntactic noise, and it doesn't even convey quite what I mean; after all ReadOnlyCollection may wrap a mutating
I was thinking about creating a new class derived from ReadOnlyCollection (class ReadOnlyMyCollection : ReadOnlyCollection or class ReadOnlyMyCollection : ReadOnlyCollection) which returns the read-only wrapper class (ReadOnlyMyItem) through the square brackets operator, but either the square brackets operator is hamiş marked kakım virtual and the return type is hamiş even the same or the constructor doesn't have an IList of the wrapper class (IList) to use. Should I build the class (ReadOnlyMyCollection) from scratch?
Objects everywhere), and it makes the construction wordier (kişi't use .ToList or collection initializers). And it doesn't really communicate intent either: such a list suggests you could add/remove values, or change them: but C# ReadOnlyCollectionBase Nasıl Kullanılır that's hamiş typical usage at all.
Hayat you arrange 25 whole numbers (not necessarily all different) so that the sum of any three successive terms is even but the sum C# ReadOnlyCollectionBase Nerelerde Kullanılıyor of all 25 is odd?
Distinct(IEnumerable) Returns distinct elements from a sequence by using the default equality comparer to compare values.
Note also that this makes your problem particularly birçok. If you don't want people changing the collections, your container need contain no mutators. If you decide later that in just one case you actually HAVE to modify it, C# ReadOnlyCollectionBase Nasıl Kullanılır you gönül create a safe mechanism to do so.
Ancak, articles1 ve articles3 dizileri aynı makale sarrafiyelıklarına farklı sıralarda iye başüstüneğundan, CompareTo metodu farklı bir kıymet döndürür ve bu dizilerin yapısal olarak denktaş olmadığını belirtir.
To guarantee thread safety during enumeration, you kişi lock the collection during the entire enumeration. To allow the collection to be accessed by multiple threads for reading and writing, you must implement your own synchronization.
If you take advantage of IntelliSense in Visual Studio to see the members of the authors list object, you’ll see a list of methods supported by List.
One might derece realize that the collection is read-only but the variable pointing to it is derece. What a ReadOnlyCollection would mean if I gönül reassign the variable itself to a new collection altogether. +1.
So, what's the best-practice way to deal with the bog-standard task of making small collections to pass C# ReadOnlyCollectionBase Kullanımı around values? Should array be preferred over List where possible?
Does this double well potential contradict the fact that there is no degeneracy for one-dimensional bound states?
A method like PayUnpaidInvoices being present may lead to second guessings about what "regular" collection methods like Remove and Clear might do. Will C# ReadOnlyCollectionBase Nasıl Kullanılır it just remove invoices from the in-memory collection, or will it delete them from the database?