Question

Here is the situation for which I am trying to find a suitable design.

I need to store profiles of numbers. A profile is just a series of numbers. They can be of either int, float or decimal type. Each profile has a ProfileDescription field based on an ennumeration.

Each Profile has a collection of ProfileVersion Objects. Each ProfileVersion object has a collection of ProfileValue objects. These ProfileValue objects are where the actual numerical values of the required type are stored.

My initial design idea was to make Profile, ProfileVersion and ProfileValue generic. I hit a problem when I want to have a List of Profiles of different types, which I cannot have. I could use an ArrayList instead, but then i would have to cast out the data within it.

I though it might be possible to make just ProfileVersion and ProfileValue generic, and then have the Profile Object assign a type to the ProfileVersion depending on the value of the ProfileDescription field, but I cannot find a way to do this.

Another thought was I should use a ProfileBase class and then subclass it with either a GenericProfileClass or IntProfile, FloatProfile and DecimalProfile, but this wouldn’t really give me any advantage over having each class being generic, as I would have to cast out the subclass each time anyway.

I would appreciate your thoughts on the best design approach for this situation.

Thanks

Answer 1

Grzenio’s idea is correct. Each of your profile classes could be made to be implementations of an IProfile object, and then your container could be:

class ProfileList : IList<T> where T: IProfile 

Thus the only constraint you’ll have is the interface, not the specific type or a casted base class.

As for:

Another thought was I should use a ProfileBase class and then subclass it with either a GenericProfileClass or IntProfile, FloatProfile and DecimalProfile, but this wouldn’t really give me any advantage over having each class being generic, as I would have to cast out the subclass each time anyway.

The benefits would really depend on the level of abstractions that you make for your classes. If designed properly you can ideally have operation/business logic/or manager classes that can accept any of those base types (again via generics) without having to know the specific cast.