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 873775
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 15, 20262026-05-15T10:59:45+00:00 2026-05-15T10:59:45+00:00

I’ve seen this pattern in Enumerator. It makes sure the collection haven’t been altered

  • 0

I’ve seen this pattern in Enumerator. It makes sure the collection haven’t been altered while enumerating over the items.

public class Versioned
{
    internal int version = 0;

    public void ThisBreaksVersion()
    {
        version++;
    }
}

public class WorksOnVersioned
{
    private readonly int version;
    private readonly Versioned versioned;

    public WorksOnVersioned(Versioned versioned)
    {
        this.versioned = versioned;
        this.version = versioned.version;
    }

    public void DoWork()
    {
        if( version != other.version )
            throw new Exception(); // Ooop.. Out of sync!
    }
}


var v1 = new Versioned();
var w1 = WorksOnVersioned(v1);
w1.DoWork(); // Yup

var v2 = new Versioned();
var w2 = WorksOnVersioned(v2);
v2.ThisBreaksVersion();
w2.DoWork(); // v2 has changed -> exception!

I can also see this is useful when using a shared resource to make sure the local copy is the same as the one in the resource.

But what is this pattern called? Is there something else it can be useful for?

  • 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
    2026-05-15T10:59:46+00:00Added an answer on May 15, 2026 at 10:59 am

    I don’t know of any named pattern for this – you might call it “version snapshotting” or something like that, where the important part is that you don’t need to snapshot the whole of the mutable data if all you’re interested in is knowing whether or not it’s changed. (i.e. a snapshot simply becomes invalid, rather than remaining unchanged in the face of changes to the original.)

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

Sidebar

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.