我试图在C#中创建一个工厂类,该工厂类返回的对象是或扩展了某种基本类型。每当我在工厂中调用getInstance()
时,都需要实例化此类型的新实例,因此,我真的只想接受并存储该类型本身。在Java中,我使用Class<? extends Base>
来保存要创建的类,然后在其上调用getInstance()
。
我了解如何在C#中使用Activator类从System.Type
创建新对象,但是我不确定的部分是对类类型的约束。我希望只能接受属于或扩展基类的Type。我意识到我可以在工厂中将设置器更改为接受基本类型的实际对象,然后从中检索类型,但是我真的不想实例化整个对象只是为了检索Type变量。
下面是一个小示例Java程序,目的是演示我的需求,以防万一我的问题不清楚。在C#中有什么方法可以做到这一点?
class Program {
public static void main(String[] args) throws InstantiationException, IllegalAccessException {
Factory.setClass(Base.class);
Base b = Factory.getInstance();
b.Print();
Factory.setClass(Child.class);
b = Factory.getInstance();
b.Print();
}
}
class Factory {
private static Class<? extends Base> type;
// What I want to do in C#.
public static void setClass(Class<? extends Base> newType) {
type = newType;
}
// What I don't want to have to do in C#.
public static void setClassFromObject(Base newTypeObject) {
type = newTypeObject.getClass();
}
public static Base getInstance() throws InstantiationException, IllegalAccessException {
return type.newInstance();
}
}
class Base {
public void Print() {
System.out.println("Hello from base.");
}
}
class Child extends Base {
@Override
public void Print() {
System.out.println("Hello from child.");
}
}
答案 0 :(得分:1)
我看不到如何在编译时强制执行此操作,但是如果您可以通过运行时检查确定,则可以这样做:
class Factory
{
private static Type _type;
public static void SetClass(Type t)
{
if (!(typeof(Base)).IsAssignableFrom(t))
{
throw new ArgumentException("type does not extend Base", nameof(t));
}
_type = t;
}
public static Base GetInstance()
{
return (Base)Activator.CreateInstance(_type);
}
}
答案 1 :(得分:0)
您可以使“ GetInstance”方法动态化,以便在设置类时也可以设置该方法。这样,您可以在运行时依赖泛型来获取正确的类型。看起来可能像这样:
public class Factory
{
private static Func<Base> _getInstance;
//option if you want to pass in an instantiated value
public static void SetClass<T>(T newType) where T : Base, new()
{
_getInstance = () => new T();
}
//option if you just want to give it a type
public static void SetClass<T>() where T : Base, new()
{
_getInstance = () => new T();
}
public static Base GetInstance()
{
return _getInstance();
}
//you could just make GetInstance Generic as well, so you don't have to set the class first
public static Base GetInstance<T>() where T : Base, new()
{
return new T();
}
}