Anonymous type function declaration

Question

Let's have a function:

Func<argsFoo, resultFoo> foo= x=>new resultFoo(x);
Func<argsBar, resultBar> bar= x=>new resultBar(x);
Func<argsBaz, resultBaz> baz= x=>new resultBaz(x);

I want to create a complex function which uses all this functions declared above.

Like this:

Func
<
    Func<argsFoo, resultFoo>,
    Func<argsBar, resultBar>,
    Func<argsBaz,resultBaz>,
    fooBarBazResult
> fooBarBaz=...

The point is such declaration is killing the readability of the programm. Type inference is not working in this case.

Question: can I use something like this?

FooBarBaz<typeof(foo),typeof(bar)>,typeof(baz)>>

I have tried and answer is no. May be anyone has another solution to make shorter the composed function declarations?

This looks strange. The last generic parameter of a Func is the return type. You have three Funcs with three different return types and still, you are trying to combine them with a Func that takes the first to of them as input and returns a Func that looks like the third? What are you really trying to do here? — Daniel Hilgarth
– Daniel Hilgarth, Commented Jul 20, 2013 at 11:58
Not related to what you ask but the lambda (x)=>{return new resultFoo(x);} (semicolon missing in your code!) can be simplified a bit, to x=>new resultFoo(x). — Jeppe Stig Nielsen
– Jeppe Stig Nielsen, Commented Jul 20, 2013 at 12:03
Daniel you are right I should correct the mistake in example. — gleb.kudr
– gleb.kudr, Commented Jul 20, 2013 at 12:10

Adi Lester · Accepted Answer · 2013-07-20 12:20:58Z

1

You can always declare your own delegate that will be describing your methods:

public delegate resultMy MyDelegate(argsMy arg)

and use the shorter name MyDelegate

Func<FooDelagate, BatDelegate, BazDelegate>

and even that delegate you can name to simplify you code.

edited Jul 20, 2013 at 12:20

Adi Lester

25.4k13 gold badges100 silver badges114 bronze badges

answered Jul 20, 2013 at 11:59

Rafal

12.7k34 silver badges56 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

2 Comments

gleb.kudr Over a year ago

Delegates are good in more static-like code such as method declarations. But anonymous functions are designed to be light weight (I suppose) and using delegates in this case makes code more robust as it used to be.

Lee Over a year ago

@gleb.kudr - Func<T, R> is a delegate type, just one that is defined in the BCL. You can only pass lambdas or anonymous functions around as delegate instances.

It'sNotALie. · Accepted Answer · 2013-07-20 11:56:55Z

0

Well, you could add a using statement at the top of your file that simplifies that:

using SomeName = Func<Func<ArgsFoo, ResultFoo>, Func<ArgsBar, ResultBar>, Func<ArgsBaz, ResultBaz>>;

And then you couls just use it as this:

SomeName myFunc = //the func

answered Jul 20, 2013 at 11:56

It'sNotALie.

22.9k12 gold badges75 silver badges109 bronze badges

2 Comments

gleb.kudr Over a year ago

On this case I can use delegates. The question is how not to use them :)

It'sNotALie. Over a year ago

@gleb.kudr The other option is reflection, which would make it far too complex.

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Anonymous type function declaration

2 Answers 2

2 Comments

2 Comments

Your Answer

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

2 Answers 2

2 Comments

2 Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Related