Normally, one would expect, and hope, that two casts are needed to first unbox a value type and then perform some kind of value type conversion into another value type. Here’s an example where this holds:
// create boxed int
IFormattable box = 42; // box.GetType() == typeof(int)
// unbox and narrow
short x1 = (short)box; // fails runtime :-)
short x2 = (short)(int)box; // OK
// unbox and make unsigned
uint y1 = (uint)box; // fails runtime :-)
uint y2 = (uint)(int)box; // OK
// unbox and widen
long z1 = (long)box; // fails runtime :-)
long z2 = (long)(int)box; // OK (cast to long could be made implicit)
As you can see from my smileys, I’m happy that these conversions will fail if I use only one cast. After all, it’s probably a coding mistake to try to unbox a value type into a different value type in one operation.
(There’s nothing special with the IFormattable interface; you could also use the object class if you prefer.)
However, today I realized that this is different with enums (when (and only when) the enums have the same underlying type). Here’s an example:
// create boxed DayOfWeek
IFormattable box = DayOfWeek.Monday; // box.GetType() == typeof(DayOfWeek)
// unbox and convert to other
// enum type in one cast
DateTimeKind dtk = (DateTimeKind)box; // succeeds runtime :-(
Console.WriteLine(box); // writes Monday
Console.WriteLine(dtk); // writes Utc
I think this behavior is unfortunate. It should really be compulsory to say (DateTimeKind)(DayOfWeek)box. Reading the C# specification, I see no justification of this difference between numeric conversions and enum conversions. It feels like the type safety is lost in this situation.
Do you think this is “unspecified behavior” that could be improved (without spec changes) in a future .NET version? It would be a breaking change.
Also, if the supplier of either of the enum types (either DayOfWeek or DateTimeKind in my example) decides to change the underlying type of one of the enum types from int to something else (could be long, short, …), then all of a sudden the above one-cast code would stop working, which seems silly.
Of course, the enums DayOfWeek and DateTimeKind are not special. These could be any enum types, including user-defined ones.
Somewhat related: Why does unboxing enums yield odd results? (unboxes an int directly into an enum)
ADDITION:
OK, so many answers and comments have focused on how enums are treated “under the hood”. While this is interesting in itself, I want to concentrate more on whether the observed behavior is covered by the C# specification.
Suppose I wrote the type:
struct YellowInteger
{
public readonly int Value;
public YellowInteger(int value)
{
Value = value;
}
// Clearly a yellow integer is completely different
// from an integer without any particular color,
// so it is important that this conversion is
// explicit
public static explicit operator int(YellowInteger yi)
{
return yi.Value;
}
}
and then said:
object box = new YellowInteger(1);
int x = (int)box;
then, does the C# spec say anything about whether this will succeed at runtime? For all I care, .NET might treat a YellowInteger as just an Int32 with different type metadata (or whatever it’s called), but can anyone guarantee that .NET does not “confuse” a YellowInteger and an Int32 when unboxing? So where in the C# spec can I see if (int)box will succeed (calling my explicit operator method)?
When you use:
You are actually unboxing and then casting.
But in your second case:
You don’t perform any casting at all. You just unbox the value. The default underlying type of the enumeration elements is int.
Update to refer to the real question:
The specification you mentioned in the comment:
This is actually correct. We cannot implicitly convert:
But we can explicitly convert:
It seems that you found a case when this is still required. But when combined with unboxing, only explicit conversion needs to be specified and unboxing can be ommited.
Update 2
Got a feeling that somebody must have noticed that before, went to Google, searched for “unboxing conversion enum” and guess what? Skeet blogged about it in 2005 (CLI spec mistake with unboxing and enums)