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

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • 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 6347449
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 24, 20262026-05-24T21:13:00+00:00 2026-05-24T21:13:00+00:00

I have a type with implicit conversion operators to most base types and tried

  • 0

I have a type with implicit conversion operators to most base types and tried to use .Cast<string>() on a collection of this type, which failed. As I dug into it, I noticed that casting via as doesn’t use implicit or explicit conversion and just won’t compile, so I guess that’s where .Cast falls down. So this fails

var enumerable = source.Cast<string>();

but this works

var enumerable = source.Select(x => (string)x);

So what’s the benefit of Cast? Sure, it’s a couple of characters shorter, but seems a lot more limited. If it can be used for conversion, is there some benefit other than the more compact syntax?

  • 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
    2026-05-24T21:13:01+00:00Added an answer on May 24, 2026 at 9:13 pm

    Cast usage

    The benefit of Cast comes when your collection only implements IEnumerable (ie. not the generic version). In this case, Cast converts all elements to TResult by casting, and returns IEnumerable<TResult>. This is handy, because all the other LINQ extension methods (including Select) is only declared for IEnumerable<T>. In code, it looks like this:

    IEnumerable source = // getting IEnumerable from somewhere
    
    // Compile error, because Select is not defined for IEnumerable.
    var results = source.Select(x => ((string)x).ToLower());
    
    // This works, because Cast returns IEnumerable<string>
    var results = source.Cast<string>().Select(x => x.ToLower());
    

    Cast and OfType are the only two LINQ extension methods that are defined for IEnumerable. OfType works like Cast, but skips elements that are not of type TResult instead of throwing an exception.

    Cast and implicit conversions

    The reason why your implicit conversion operator is not working when you use Cast is simple: Cast casts object to TResult – and your conversion is not defined for object, only for your specific type. The implementation for Cast is something like this:

    foreach (object obj in source)
        yield return (TResult) obj;
    

    This “failure” of cast to do the conversion corresponds to the basic conversion rules – as seen by this example:

    YourType x = new YourType(); // assume YourType defines an implicit conversion to string
    object   o = x;
    
    string bar = (string)x;      // Works, the implicit operator is hit.
    string foo = (string)o;      // Fails, no implicit conversion between object and string
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have a custom struct type that supports implicit conversion to and from string
I have a question about the implicit type conversion Why does this implicit type
I have a type which I consider use it as struct. It represents single
This isn't exactly the definition of implicit type conversion, but I'm curious how many
I have a question about MS SQL Server string-to-datetime implicit conversion. Specifically, can I
I have a question regarding type conversion in C#. Object data_obj = test; string
I have a generic class that I'm trying to implement implicit type casting for.
The following code fails in 'Evaluate' with: This expression was expected to have type
I have a Type, a String and an Object. Is there some way I
I have seen similar questions to this, but they involve different types so I

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.