Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 1071225
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 16, 20262026-05-16T20:41:03+00:00 2026-05-16T20:41:03+00:00

I don’t think this is possible but here goes… I want to add method

  • 0

I don’t think this is possible but here goes…

I want to add method that can handle n numer of generics. for example :

bool<T> MyMethod() where T: Isomething
{
}

will work for one type

bool<T,K> MyMethod() where T: Isomething
{
}

will work for two types

Is there a way to work with n types – e.g.

bool<T[]> MyMethod() where T: Isomething
{
}

the reason I want to do this is to implement a static nhibernate helper method which can load from multiple assemblies – right now it works great for one assembly. My current method is as shown below:

        public static ISessionFactory GetMySqlSessionFactory<T>(string connectionString, bool BuildSchema)
    {
        //configuring is meant to be costly so just do it once for each db and store statically
        if (!AllFactories.ContainsKey(connectionString))
        {
            var configuration =
            Fluently.Configure()
            .Database(MySQLConfiguration.Standard
                      .ConnectionString(connectionString)
                      .ShowSql() //for development/debug only..
                      .UseOuterJoin()
                      .QuerySubstitutions("true 1, false 0, yes 'Y', no 'N'"))
            .Mappings(m =>
                      {
                          m.FluentMappings.AddFromAssemblyOf<T>();
                          m.AutoMappings.Add(AutoMap.AssemblyOf<T>().Conventions.Add<CascadeAll>);
                      })
            .ExposeConfiguration(cfg =>
                                 {
                                     new SchemaExport(cfg)
                                     .Create(BuildSchema, BuildSchema);
                                 });
            AllFactories[connectionString] = configuration.BuildSessionFactory();
        }

        return AllFactories[connectionString];
    }

Where the line: m.FluentMappings.AddFromAssemblyOf(), I would like to add multiple types e.g.

foreach(T in T[]){
   m.FluentMappings.AddFromAssemblyOf<T>()

}

Obviously this couldn’t work I’m not completely dumb but I am not so hot on generics – can someone confirm that this isn’t possible 🙂 ..? What would be the most elegant way of achieving this effect in your opinion..?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-16T20:41:05+00:00Added an answer on May 16, 2026 at 8:41 pm

    No – the arity of generic types and methods is fixed on a per-type/method basis.

    That’s why there are all the different Action<...>, Func<...> and Tuple<...> types in the framework.

    Occasionally that’s a shame, but it gets in the way relatively rarely, and I suspect all kinds of things would be a lot more complicated with variable arity.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Don't ask me why but i can't use this method because I need to
Don't know if anyone can help me with this or if it's even possible.
Don't know why but I can't find a solution to this. I have 3
don't know better title for this, but here's my code. I have class user
I don't know why, but this code worked for me a month ago... maybe
Don't know if I worded the question right, but basically what I want to
(Don't know if this is strictly on-topic, but I don't see any better Stack
Don't think that I'm mad, I understand how php works! That being said. I
I don't know if this question is trivial or not. But after a couple
Don't know why this doesn't work. I can't do implicit animation for a newly

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.