简体   繁体   English

C#泛型,状态模式的交叉引用类

[英]C# generics, cross referencing classes for state pattern

I am trying to get into C# generics and have created a state machine with the state pattern and now I try to refactor. 我正在尝试使用C#泛型,并使用状态模式创建了状态机,现在我尝试进行重构。

I have a state, which has a reference to the object it's working on. 我有一个状态,该状态引用了它正在处理的对象。

public abstract class AbstractState<T> where T : StatefulObject {

    protected T statefulObject;

    public AbstractState(T statefulObject) {
        this.statefulObject = statefulObject;
    }

}

and I have the object which has states, this should have a reference to its current state. 并且我有具有状态的对象,这应该引用其当前状态。

public abstract class StatefulObject<T> : MonoBehaviour where T : AbstractState<StatefulObject<T>> {

    public T state;

}

But it does not work ("the type cannot be used as type parameter 't' in the generic type or method"). 但这是行不通的(“该类型不能在通用类型或方法中用作类型参数't'”)。

What I want to achieve is something like this : 我想要实现的是这样的:

public class Monster : StatefulObject<MonsterState> {

}

public abstract class MonsterState : AbstractState<Monster> {

}

Is this possible? 这可能吗? If it's not this way, is there another? 如果不是这样,还有其他吗? Thx. 谢谢。

You can abuse interfaces and variance to achieve that: 您可以滥用接口和差异来实现以下目的:

public interface IState<out TObject, in TState>
    where TObject : IStatefulObject<TObject, TState>
    where TState : IState<TObject, TState>
{
}

public interface IStatefulObject<in TObject, out TState>
    where TObject : IStatefulObject<TObject, TState>
    where TState : IState<TObject, TState>
{
}

public abstract class AbstractState<TObject> : IState<TObject, AbstractState<TObject>>
    where TObject : IStatefulObject<TObject, AbstractState<TObject>>
{
    protected TObject Object { get; private set; }

    public AbstractState(TObject obj)
    {
        Object = obj;
    }
}

public abstract class StatefulObject<TState> : IStatefulObject<StatefulObject<TState>, TState>
    where TState : IState<StatefulObject<TState>, TState>
{
    protected TState State { get; set; }
}

public class Monster : StatefulObject<MonsterState>
{
    public Monster()
    {
        State = new IdleMonsterState(this);
    }
}

public abstract class MonsterState : AbstractState<Monster>
{
    protected MonsterState(Monster monster)
        : base(monster)
    {
    }
}

public class IdleMonsterState : MonsterState
{
    public IdleMonsterState(Monster monster)
        : base(monster)
    {
    }
}

Whether it's actually a good idea is dubious, such code may be too confusing. 不管它实际上是一个好主意,还是令人怀疑的,这样的代码可能太令人困惑了。


You could also go with the simpler (but less strongly-typed) approach: 您还可以使用更简单(但类型不那么强)的方法:

public abstract class AbstractState
{
}

public abstract class StatefulObject
{
}

public abstract class AbstractState<TObject> : AbstractState
    where TObject : StatefulObject
{
    protected TObject Object { get; private set; }

    public AbstractState(TObject obj)
    {
        Object = obj;
    }
}

public abstract class StatefulObject<TState> : StatefulObject
    where TState : AbstractState
{
    protected TState State { get; set; }
}

public class Monster : StatefulObject<MonsterState>
{
}

public abstract class MonsterState : AbstractState<Monster>
{
    protected MonsterState(Monster monster)
        : base(monster)
    {
    }
}

This won't ensure you won't be able to assign, say a PlayerState to a Monster , you should check that at runtime. 例如,这不能确保您无法将Monster分配给PlayerState ,您应该在运行时检查一下。

声明:本站的技术帖子网页,遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议,如果您需要转载,请注明本站网址或者原文地址。任何问题请咨询:yoyou2525@163.com.

 
粤ICP备18138465号  © 2020-2024 STACKOOM.COM