driisdriis 163k4545 gold badges268268 silver badges343343 bronze badges 3 Sorry, but even now there are plenty of uses for library code to use IList (non-generic). Anyone who says otherwise hasn't suffered enough reflection / data-binding / etc ;)
Arec BarrwinArec Barrwin 61.8k99 gold badges3030 silver badges2525 bronze badges 14 71 I have to disagree with your sardonic answer. I don't totally disagree with the sentiment of over-architecture being a real sıkıntı. However I think that especially in the case of collections that interfaces really shine.
Edit: You do need to be quick to get answers in here. Birli I presented a slightly different syntax to the other answers, I will leave my answer - however, the other answers presented are equally valid.
David MillsDavid Mills 2,41511 gold badge2323 silver badges2525 bronze badges 6 2 The right approach really would have been to offer an ISortableList interface (with methods to sort a portion of the list using some particular comparer), have List implement it, and have a static method which could sort any IList by checking whether it implemented ISortableList and, if not, copying it to an array, sorting that, clearing the IList, and re-adding the items.
Your code is now broken, because int[] implements IList, but is of fixed size. The contract for ICollection (the base of IList) requires the code that uses it to check the IsReadOnly flag before attempting to add or remove items from the collection. The contract for List does hamiş.
The Liskov Substitution Principle (simplified) states that a derived type should be able to be used in place of a base type, with no additional C# IList Neden Kullanmalıyız preconditions or postconditions.
Remove Silinmesini istenilen kıymeti siler. Silinecek haysiyet liste ortamında çabucak çokça olması durumunda ilk kıymeti kaldırır. Bu metodu çoğu kez referans tipler ile fehamet çıkarmak muhtevain kullanılır. Fakat kıymet tipleri ile bile kullanılabilir.
In fact, any time you are using reflection IList is more convenient than IList-of-T, since generics and reflection don't play nicely together. It birey be done, but it is a pain. Unfortunately since IList-of-T doesn't derive from IList there are cases where this birey fail - but it is a good 95% rule.
Whether you return an Interface or a concrete type depends upon what you want to let your callers do with the object you created -- this is an API design decision, and there's C# IList Nedir no hard and fast rule. You have to weigh their ability to make full use of the object against their ability to easily use a portion of the objects functionality (and C# IList Nasıl Kullanılır of course whether you WANT them to be making full use of the object).
class Kisi string ad; string soyad; public string Ad get C# IList Nedir return ad; kaş ad = value; public string Soyad get return soyad; seki soyad = value;
IList is not a class; it's an interface that classes birey implement. The interface itself is C# IList Nasıl Kullanılır just a contract between the consumer of the class and the class itself. This line of code will work:
Şimdi bu arada bir örnek yapalım. Bir bir numara yönlü rabıtalı liste oluşturalım ve bu listeye değme olarak eleman ekleyelim. Bu eklediğimiz elemanları da ekrana yazdıralım:
Unless you have a very compelling reason to do so, your best bet will be to inherit from System.Collections.ObjectModel.Collection since it katışıksız everything you need.
So I have been playing around with some of my methods on how to do this. I am still hamiş sure about the return type(if I should make it more concrete or an interface).