0

It's probable the question of typization (in C++ with STL everything would be made through std::vector and no questions would appear).

I have an ArrayList and I'd like to store some structs there. Like

    struct txtRange
    {
        public String sText;
        public String sTag;
        public int iBeg;
        public int iEnd;
    };

    ArrayList Ranges = new ArrayList();   

    txtRange iRange;
    iRange.sText = entityText;
    iRange.sTag = "";
    iRange.iBeg = Ranges.Count > 0 ? Ranges[Ranges.Count - 1].iEnd + 1 : 0;
    iRange.iEnd = iRange.iBeg + tmpstr.Length;
    Ranges.Add(iRange);

Actually, I have troubles when accessing Ranges[Ranges.Count - 1].iEnd: 'object' does not contain a definition for 'iEnd'. How should a ArrayList of the type specified be created?

The similar question (How to cast object/structure into arraylist?) made me laugh a bit... But still, there is an explanation how to add structures into ArrayList but not how to get the values from there.

Improve this question
1
  • "in C++ with STL everything would be made through std::vector and no questions would appear" -- check out List<T> (in System.Collections.Generic). You can put structs in that without casting, boxing and unboxing. Unless you really need a heterogeneous collection, it's a much better choice than ArrayList. Commented Nov 12, 2009 at 7:01

5 Answers 5

Reset to default
5

You have three problems here:

  1. You're using mutable structs. That's a bad idea to start with. Why isn't txtRange a class?

  2. You're using public fields - no encapsulation.

  3. You're using the non-generic ArrayList type which means everything is getting boxed and you only have weak typing.

You can cast the result as you remove it, but then if you want to change the contents, you'll have to put it back again (because it's a struct, and is being copied each time). The snippet you've given doesn't actually need to change anything, but you're likely to run into it at some point. Here's the snippet in working code:

txtRange iRange;
iRange.sText = entityText;
iRange.sTag = "";
iRange.iBeg = Ranges.Count > 0 ? ((txtRange) Ranges[Ranges.Count - 1]).iEnd + 1 
                               : 0;
iRange.iEnd = iRange.iBeg + tmpstr.Length;
Ranges.Add(iRange);

However, I would suggest:

  • Rename txtRange to TextRange
  • Use a generic List<T> instead of ArrayList unless somehow you're working on a platform which doesn't support generics (the microframework or .NET 1.1)
  • Either make TextRange immutable, or make it a class - or possibly both
  • Use properties instead of public fields (see here for more reasons)
  • Avoid using abbreviations, and I would personally ditch the "i" prefix (I'd use Start, Tag, End, Text)
Improve this answer
Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

1 Comment

I got curious why mutable structs are bad and for those who also wonder here is the answer I found: blogs.msdn.com/ericlippert/archive/2008/05/14/…
2

As I see it, you just need to cast the output.

((txtRange)Ranges[Ranges.Count-1]).iEnd

Or use List<txtRange> instead for strongly typed loving.

Improve this answer

Comments

0

You need to first cast it to a type of txtRange before you can access its propertys the way you specified.

Or you can always go the List<T> where t is txtRange route as that will work without casting

Improve this answer

Comments

0 
iRange.iBeg = Ranges.Count > 0 ? ((txtRange)Ranges[Ranges.Count - 1]).iEnd + 1 : 0;
Improve this answer

Comments

0

Thanks, the problem can both be solved by an explicit cast like

 iRange.iBeg = Ranges.Count > 0 ? ((txtRange)Ranges[Ranges.Count - 1]).iEnd + 1 : 0;

or by using generics.

Improve this answer

Comments

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.