C# 我该如何解决这个问题以将通用转换为 Nullable<T>?

声明:本页面是StackOverFlow热门问题的中英对照翻译,遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议,如果您需要使用它,必须同样遵循CC BY-SA许可,注明原文地址和作者信息,同时你必须将它归于原作者(不是我):StackOverFlow 原文地址: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/793714/
Warning: these are provided under cc-by-sa 4.0 license. You are free to use/share it, But you must attribute it to the original authors (not me): StackOverFlow

提示:将鼠标放在中文语句上可以显示对应的英文。显示中英文
时间:2020-08-05 01:24:14  来源:igfitidea点击:

How can I fix this up to do generic conversion to Nullable<T>?

c#nullable

提问by TheSoftwareJedi

I currently use this handy conversion extension method to do conversions between types:

我目前使用这个方便的转换扩展方来进行类型之间的转换:

    public static T To<T>(this IConvertible obj)
    {
        return (T)Convert.ChangeType(obj, typeof(T));
    }

However, it doesn't like converting valid values to Nullable, for example, this fails:

但是,它不喜欢将有效值转换为 Nullable,例如,这会失败:

    "1".To<int?>();

Obviously, 1 is easily converted to an (int?), but it gets the error:

显然,1 很容易转换为 (int?),但它会得到错误:

    Invalid cast from 'System.String' to 'System.Nullable`1[[System.Int32, mscorlib, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089]]'.

This is an obviously simplified example, in reality I'm using it to do conversions from string types like so:

这是一个明显简化的示例,实际上我使用它来进行字符串类型的转换,如下所示:

packageDb.Quantity = package.package.ElementDeep(Namespace + "PackageQuantity", Namespace + "ActualQuantity", Namespace + "Quantity").ValueOrNull().To<int?>();

If Convert.ChangeType doesn't like Nullable, anyone have any great ideas?

如果 Convert.ChangeType 不喜欢 Nullable,有人有什么好主意吗?

采纳答案by LukeH

public static T To<T>(this IConvertible obj)
{
    Type t = typeof(T);
    Type u = Nullable.GetUnderlyingType(t);

    if (u != null)
    {
        return (obj == null) ? default(T) : (T)Convert.ChangeType(obj, u);
    }
    else
    {
        return (T)Convert.ChangeType(obj, t);
    }
}

回答by Adam Robinson

Maybe I'm missing the point, but in the instance of Nullable, how does your method provide either a readability, performance, or maintenance advantage over a simple cast, like (int?)1?

也许我没有抓住重点,但是在 Nullable 的实例中,与简单的强制转换相比,您的方如何提供可读性、性能或维护优势,例如(int?)1

Aside from that, perhaps another extension method?

除此之外,也许是另一种扩展方?

public static T? ToNullable<T>(this T obj) where T:struct
{
    return (T?)obj;
}

Edit

编辑

After reviewing your edit, why would the generic function that I provided not work as a substitute to your To<T>function in that line of code? You can't allow a conversion to Nullable for any type (which is why ChangeTypedoesn't work) because that generic only accepts value types. You'll either have to use a function like the one I provided or change your signature of To<T>to only accept value types and add a special case for Nullable<T>.

在查看您的编辑后,为什么我提供的通用函数不能To<T>在该行代码中替代您的函数?您不能允许任何类型转换为 Nullable(这就是为什么ChangeType不起作用),因为该泛型只接受值类型。您要么必须使用我提供的函数,要么将您的签名更改To<T>为仅接受值类型并为Nullable<T>.

回答by Nathan Koop

This is the method that I currently use (I got my answer on SO), it converts from string to nullable type:

这是我目前使用的方(我在SO上得到了答案),它从字符串转换为可空类型:

    public static Nullable<T> ConvertToNullable<T>(this string s) where T : struct
    {
        if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(s.Trim()))
        {
            TypeConverter conv = TypeDescriptor.GetConverter(typeof(Nullable<>).MakeGenericType(typeof(T)));
            return (Nullable<T>)conv.ConvertFrom(s);
        }
        return null;
    }

回答by Henrique

public static T To<T>(this IConvertible obj) 
{
    Type t = typeof(T);
    if (t.IsGenericType && t.GetGenericTypeDefinition() == typeof(Nullable<>))
        t = t.GetGenericArguments()[0];

    return (T)Convert.ChangeType(obj, t); 
}

But if the conversion fail, it will throw an exception, not returning a null as should be expected.

但是如果转换失败,它将抛出异常,而不是像预期的那样返回 null。

回答by Eugenio Miró

Luke's solution was good for me (and obviously got his up vote) but I simplified it for me this way

卢克的解决方案对我有好处(显然得到了他的支持),但我以这种方式为我简化了它

    private static Type ResolveType(String typeName)
    {
        Type t = Type.GetType(typeName);
        if (t == null)
            return null;

        Type u = Nullable.GetUnderlyingType(t);

        if (u != null) {
            t = u;
        }
        return t;
    }

because I started from a string not from a type... thoughts?

因为我从一个字符串而不是一个类型开始......想?

回答by Nick Strupat

I've ended up with this

我已经结束了这个

private static T To<T>(this Object @object, Boolean returnDefaultOnException)
{
    Type type = typeof(T);
    Type underlyingTypeOfNullable = Nullable.GetUnderlyingType(type);
    try
    {
        return (T) Convert.ChangeType(@object, underlyingTypeOfNullable ?? type);
    }
    catch (Exception exception)
    {
        if (returnDefaultOnException)
            return default(T);
        String typeName = type.Name;
        if (underlyingTypeOfNullable != null)
            typeName += " of " + underlyingTypeOfNullable.Name;
        throw new InvalidCastException("Object can't be cast to " + typeName, exception);

    }
}
public static T To<T>(this Object @object) { return @object.To<T>(returnDefaultOnException: false); }
public static T ToOrDefault<T>(this Object @object) { return @object.To<T>(returnDefaultOnException: true); }

It behaves like the LINQ extension methods Singleand SingleOrDefaultand Firstand FirstOrDefault.

它的行为像LINQ扩展方SingleSingleOrDefaultFirstFirstOrDefault

In short, To<T>()tries to convert and throws on failure while ToOrDefault<T>()tries to convert and returns default(T)on failure.

简而言之,To<T>()尝试转换并在失败时抛出,而ToOrDefault<T>()尝试转换并default(T)在失败时返回。

回答by Hossein Shahabi

extend @LukeH code:

扩展@LukeH 代码:

public static T GetValue<T>(string Literal, T DefaultValue)
    {
        if (Literal == null || Literal == "" || Literal == string.Empty) return DefaultValue;
        IConvertible obj = Literal;
        Type t = typeof(T);
        Type u = Nullable.GetUnderlyingType(t);

        if (u != null)
        {
            return (obj == null) ? DefaultValue : (T)Convert.ChangeType(obj, u);
        }
        else
        {
            return (T)Convert.ChangeType(obj, t);
        }
    }

回答by Pangamma

This method does what you need, and it looks nice while doing it.

这种方可以满足您的需求,并且在执行时看起来不错。

    /// <summary>
    /// <para>More convenient than using T.TryParse(string, out T). 
    /// Works with primitive types, structs, and enums.
    /// Tries to parse the string to an instance of the type specified.
    /// If the input cannot be parsed, null will be returned.
    /// </para>
    /// <para>
    /// If the value of the caller is null, null will be returned.
    /// So if you have "string s = null;" and then you try "s.ToNullable...",
    /// null will be returned. No null exception will be thrown. 
    /// </para>
    /// <author>Contributed by Taylor Love (Pangamma)</author>
    /// </summary>
    /// <typeparam name="T"></typeparam>
    /// <param name="p_self"></param>
    /// <returns></returns>
    public static T? ToNullable<T>(this string p_self) where T : struct
    {
        if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(p_self))
        {
            var converter = System.ComponentModel.TypeDescriptor.GetConverter(typeof(T));
            if (converter.IsValid(p_self)) return (T)converter.ConvertFromString(p_self);
            if (typeof(T).IsEnum) { T t; if (Enum.TryParse<T>(p_self, out t)) return t;}
        }

        return null;
    }

https://github.com/Pangamma/PangammaUtilities-CSharp/tree/master/src/StringExtensions

https://github.com/Pangamma/PangammaUtilities-CSharp/tree/master/src/StringExtensions