When we define our interfaces in C# 4.0, we are allowed to mark each of the generic parameters as in or out. If we try to set a generic parameter as out and that\'d lead to a problem, the compiler rai
I have some entities created with LINQ-to-SQL. Six of these entities (representing values primarily in drop-down lists) implement an interface I\'ve called IValue. I did this because the UI layer is g
using namespace boost; class A {}; class B : public A {}; class X { virtual shared_ptr<A> foo(); }; class Y : public X {
I don\'t understand why \'x\' below converts, but \'y\' and \'z\' do not. var li开发者_如何学Pythonst = new List<List<int>>();
I\'m having a little trouble understanding how I would use covariance and contravariance in the real world.
I think this is about covariance but I\'m weak on the topic... I have a generic Event class used for things like database persistance, let\'s say like this:
I am having trouble understanding the following article: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp01255.html
This has been introduced in C# 4.0, but is there a way to achieve this in c# 3.0? For e.g., consider the following code:
I am just trying to understand the 开发者_JAVA技巧extends keyword in Java Generics. List<? extends Animal> means we can stuff any object in the List which IS A Animal
What is the real reason for that limitation? Is it just work that had to be done? Is it conceptually hard? Is it impossible?
加载中,请稍侯......