See the four lines in the Go() method below:
delegate void Action<T>(T arg);
delegate void Action();
void DoSomething<T>(Action<T> action)
{
//...
}
void DoSomething(Action action)
{
//...
}
void MyAction<T>(T arg)
{
//...
}
void MyAction()
{
//...
}
void Go<T>()
{
DoSomething<T>(MyAction<T>); // throws compiler error - why?
DoSomething(new Action<T>(MyAction<T>)); // no problems here
DoSomething(MyAction); // what's the difference between this...
DoSomething(new Action(MyAction)); // ... and this?
}
Note that the compiler error generated by the first call is:
The type arguments for method ‘Action(T)’ cannot be inferred from the usage. Try specifying the type arguments explicitly.
There’s no difference between
MyActionandnew Action(MyAction)(when they’re both valid) other than the former won’t work in C# 1. This is animplicit method group conversion. There are times that this isn’t applicable, most notable when the compiler can’t work out what kind of delegate you want, e.g.This comes into play in your question because both of the methods involved are overloaded. This leads to headaches, basically.
As for the generics side – it’s interesting. Method groups don’t get much love from C# 3 type inference – I’m not sure whether that’s going to be improved in C# 4 or not. If you call a generic method and specify the type argument, type inference works fairly well – but if you try to do it the other way round, it fails:
Type inference in C# 3 is very complicated, and works well in most cases (in particular it’s great for LINQ) but fails in a few others. In an ideal world, it would become easier to understand and more powerful in future versions… we’ll see!