Comments on: The Missing .NET #2: Collection AddRange()

By: Jason Kemp

Jason Kemp — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 14:40:54 +0000

In this case, not really. The var keyword just tells the compiler, “figure out this type for me, we both know what it is, so I don’t have to write out the type name.” You can use it anywhere you declare a method variable.

I can’t say for certain, but I’m pretty sure that the compiler will convert ‘var’ to ‘T’ for us.

By: Michael Ehrt

Michael Ehrt — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 12:54:48 +0000

Hmmm … why is it

foreach (var item in collection)

and not

foreach (T item in collection)

…? Is there a difference to it I can’t spot?

By: Richard Collette

Richard Collette — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 14:17:18 +0000

I modified the code for the simple FindIndex and Find cases to use a foreach since some collection implementations may have to actually iterate through N elements to get to the Nth element. When possible I try to avoid indexes in a loop due to the potential performance issues.

With the Find methods, I stored the item being predicated and returned that item rather than getting it again by index due to the reason just mentioned.

By: Vladimir Kelman

Vladimir Kelman — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:24:16 +0000

Hi! Thank you for your article. In The Visual Studio Code Analysis Team Blog they explained (http://blogs.msdn.com/fxcop/archive/2006/04/27/585476.aspx) how to ensure that we could re-use List methods in our concrete implementation of a generic Collection class, whenever it is necessary. The catch there was that a developer has to remember to call base class constructor : base(new List[Address]()) to guarantee that Collection is actually a List too.
To make developer’s life easier, I proposed to make a generic Collection class with that special type of constructor and all the “missing” methods as well.
Please take a look at http://pro-thoughts.blogspot.com/2008/07/generic-listcollection-class-take-2.html and tell me what you think.