Question

It probably isn’t possible, but I want to check if something like this can be expressed in a simple way:

// obviously doesn't work
class Foo<T> : IFoo<T1,T2>
    where T: Bar<T1,T2>
{
    // ...
    Baz<T1,T2> getBaz(){...}
}

Right now I declare Foo<T1,T2>, but I don’t like it semantically, and the only way to get the constraint is to also list Bar in Foo‘s generic parameter list and I am looking to reduce the redundancy, not add to it.

EDIT: Baz<T1,T2> should be a return type, not method name

Answer 1

You could create a wrapper class around it, but I doubt this is better than your original solution:

  public class FooWrapper<T1, T2>
  {
     public Foo<Bar<T1, T2>> FooObj;

     public FooWrapper()
     {
        FooObj = new Foo<Bar<T1, T2>>();
     }

     public class Foo<T> : IFoo<T1, T2> where T : Bar<T1, T2>
     {
        // ...
        public void Baz() 
        {
           Type t1 = typeof(T1);
           Type t2 = typeof(T2);
        }
     }
  }