Skip to main content

Field like events and polymorphic invocation

Ce vi se pare gresit in codul de mai jos:
public class Base
{
public virtual event EventHandler EventOne;
}
public class Derived : Base
{
public override event EventHandler EventOne;
public void DoAction()
{
...
EventOne(this, args);
}
}
In clasa de baza avem un eveniment la care se poate face override in orice clasa derivata. Desi la prima vedere totul pare sa fie in ordine daca ne uitam mai atent, putem sa observam o problema care poate sa apara din cauza la override.
EventOne o sa existe in doua locatii diferite, atat in clasa de baza cat si in clasa derivata. Din aceasta cauza o sa fie momente cand EventOne din clasa de baza nu o sa fie niciodata instantiat.
Din aceasta cauza, in cazul in care evenimentul este apelat din clasa de baza ne putem trezi cu un comportament ciudat, precum NullReferenceException sau sa se execute cod la aruncarea unui eveniment pe care noi nu ne-am astepta sa se execute.
Ce putem sa facem ca sa rezolvam aceasta problema?
Avem la indemana doua solutii. Prima varianta este sa eliminam virtual si override. O sa fie nevoie sa ne declaram o metode de tip "event-firing" in clasa de baza. Aceasta metoda o sa fie adaugata in clasa de baza si tot ce va face este sa arunce evenimentul nostru. In clasa derivata nu se va folosii direct evenimentul ci se va apela metoda pe care noi am declarato in clasa de baza. Iar aceata la randul ei o sa arunce evenimentul. Mai jos puteti sa gasiti implementarea propusa:
public class Base
{
public event EventHandler EventOne;
public void FireEventOne(object sender, EventArgs args)
{
if (EventOne != null)
{
EventOne(sender, args);
}
}
}
public class Derived
{
public void DoAction()
{
...
FireEventOne(this, args);
}
}

In varianta data mai sus, clasa derivata nu mai poate sa faca override la eveniment, aceasta putand doar sa se inscrie la acest eveniment. Field-ul EventOne nu o sa mai fie duplicat in clasa de baza. Prim aceasta metoda am eliminat orice comportament ciudat care ar fi putut sa apara.
Daca avem nevoie sa facem override, atunci va recomand sa mergeti pe varianta in care in clasa de baza evenimentul sa fie declarat ca si abstract( nu consider aceasta variata ca fiind cea mai sanatoasa).
public class Base
{
public abstract event EventHandler EventOne;
}
Va recomand sa va ganditi de doua ori daca chiar aveti nevoie de un eveniment abstract. S-ar putea ca design-ul pe care l-ati ales sa nu fie cel mai bun.

Comments

  1. Pai cred ca prima intrebare ar fi: de ce ar avea nevoie cineva sa declare un event .. virtual si sa faca override la el?

    La urma urmei, event EventHandler nu e decat o colectie de delegates..

    Eventual daca vrea sa customizeze modul in care sunt stocati acei delegates folosing add/remove accessors sau sa fie thread-safe, da' ..

    ReplyDelete
  2. Si mie mi se pare un pic trasa de par. Iar FireEventOn - numita , de obicei, OnEventOne e ceea ce fac de obicei.

    ReplyDelete
  3. In doua proiecte diferite am vazut problema asta. Partea buna ii ca ReSharper-ul urla destul de tare cand vede probleme de genul acesta.

    ReplyDelete
  4. La http://blogs.msdn.com/b/samng/archive/2007/11/26/virtual-events-in-c.aspx se pare ca explica un nene de la Microsoft mai in detaliu care e problema, si de ce nu o pot fixa cum ar vrea..

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Windows Docker Containers can make WIN32 API calls, use COM and ASP.NET WebForms

After the last post , I received two interesting questions related to Docker and Windows. People were interested if we do Win32 API calls from a Docker container and if there is support for COM. WIN32 Support To test calls to WIN32 API, let’s try to populate SYSTEM_INFO class. [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public struct SYSTEM_INFO { public uint dwOemId; public uint dwPageSize; public uint lpMinimumApplicationAddress; public uint lpMaximumApplicationAddress; public uint dwActiveProcessorMask; public uint dwNumberOfProcessors; public uint dwProcessorType; public uint dwAllocationGranularity; public uint dwProcessorLevel; public uint dwProcessorRevision; } ... [DllImport("kernel32")] static extern void GetSystemInfo(ref SYSTEM_INFO pSI); ... SYSTEM_INFO pSI = new SYSTEM_INFO(

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see

Navigating Cloud Strategy after Azure Central US Region Outage

 Looking back, July 19, 2024, was challenging for customers using Microsoft Azure or Windows machines. Two major outages affected customers using CrowdStrike Falcon or Microsoft Azure computation resources in the Central US. These two outages affected many people and put many businesses on pause for a few hours or even days. The overlap of these two issues was a nightmare for travellers. In addition to blue screens in the airport terminals, they could not get additional information from the airport website, airline personnel, or the support line because they were affected by the outage in the Central US region or the CrowdStrike outage.   But what happened in reality? A faulty CrowdStrike update affected Windows computers globally, from airports and healthcare to small businesses, affecting over 8.5m computers. Even if the Falson Sensor software defect was identified and a fix deployed shortly after, the recovery took longer. In parallel with CrowdStrike, Microsoft provided a too