Skip to main content

Multiple Class Implementations

I'm doing a variety of work in both C# and VB.Net these days (as well as VFP).

Every now and then, I come across helpful concepts in the languages that are likely obvious to most developers but may not be known by all of them. If I find something that is of particular interest, I'll put it under these types of posts.

Today, I had a class that implemented multiple interfaces. Both of these interfaces had a similar method: SetReadOnly. So you have two choices:
1. Create a new interface that this class can implement that has the SetReadOnly interface so I only have to implement the one

2. Create two methods that implement that particular method.

Most people are used to VB.Net's handling for Select Case statements where you can put multiple conditions on one line:

Select
Case "A","B","C"
End Select

What I wasn't aware of was that you can use it for Implements as well.

When you add the "Implements xxxx", VS automatically adds the various functions that you have to implement. So in this case, I received TWO methods:

Public Function SetReadOnly() Implements Interface1.SetReadOnly

and then

Public Function SetReadOnly1() Implements Interface2.SetReadOnly

I asked around briefly if this was necessary. As it turns out, it's not. You can easily do:

Public Function SetReadOnly Implements Interface1.SetReadOnly, Interface2.SetReadonly

End Function

Handy way of reducing code.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Elevating Project Specifications with Three Insightful ChatGPT Prompts

For developers and testers, ChatGPT, the freely accessible tool from OpenAI, is game-changing. If you want to learn a new programming language, ask for samples or have it convert your existing code. This can be done in Visual Studio Code (using GitHub CoPilot) or directly in the ChatGPT app or web site.  If you’re a tester, ChatGPT can write a test spec or actual test code (if you use Jest or Cypress) based on existing code, copied and pasted into the input area. But ChatGPT can be of huge value for analysts (whether system or business) who need to validate their needs. There’s often a disconnect between developers and analysts. Analysts complain that developers don’t build what they asked for or ask too many questions. Developers complain that analysts haven’t thought of obvious things. In these situations, ChatGPT can be a great intermediary. At its worst, it forces you to think about and then discount obvious issues. At best, it clarifies the needs into documented requirements. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Respect

Respect is something humans give to each other through personal connection. It’s the bond that forms when we recognize something—or someone—as significant, relatable, or worthy of care. This connection doesn’t have to be limited to people. There was an  article  recently that described the differing attitudes towards AI tools such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini (formerly Bard). Some people treat them like a standard search while others form a sort of personal relationship — being courteous, saying “please” and “thank you”. Occasionally, people share extra details unrelated to their question, like, ‘I’m going to a wedding. What flower goes well with a tuxedo?’ Does an AI “care” how you respond to it? Of course not — it reflects the patterns it’s trained on. Yet our interaction shapes how these tools evolve, and that influence is something we should take seriously. Most of us have all expressed frustration when an AI “hallucinates”. Real or not, the larger issue is that we have hi...
Post a Comment
Read more

When A Machine Starts To Care

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Arthur C. Clarke (1962)  I first used that quote when I was starting out in the tech industry. Back then, it was a way to illustrate just how fast and powerful computers had become. Querying large datasets in seconds felt magical—at least to those who didn’t build them.  Today, we’re facing something even more extraordinary. Large Language Models (LLMs) can now carry on conversations that approach human-level fluency. Clarke’s quote applies again. And just as importantly, many researchers argue that LLMs meet—or at least brush up against—the criteria of the Turing Test.  We tend to criticize LLMs for their “hallucinations,” their sometimes-confident inaccuracies. But let’s be honest: we also complain when our friends misremember facts or recount things inaccurately. This doesn’t excuse LLMs—it simply highlights that the behavior isn’t entirely alien. In some ways, it mirrors our own cognitive limits....
Post a Comment
Read more