Generics in .NET
Generics let you tailor a method, class, structure, or interface to the precise data type it acts upon. For example, instead of using the Hashtable
class, which allows keys and values to be of any type, you can use the Dictionary<TKey,TValue>
generic class and specify the types allowed for the key and the value. Among the benefits of generics are increased code reusability and type safety. [1]
1. Define and use generics
Generics are classes, structures, interfaces, and methods that have placeholders (type parameters) for one or more of the types that they store or use. A generic collection class might use a type parameter as a placeholder for the type of objects that it stores. The type parameters appear as the types of its fields and the parameter types of its methods. A generic method might use its type parameter as the type of its return value or as the type of one of its formal parameters.
The following code illustrates a simple generic class definition.
public class SimpleGenericClass<T>
{
public T Field;
}
When you create an instance of a generic class, you specify the actual types to substitute for the type parameters. This establishes a new generic class, referred to as a constructed generic class, with your chosen types substituted everywhere that the type parameters appear. The result is a type-safe class that is tailored to your choice of types, as the following code illustrates.
public static void Main()
{
SimpleGenericClass<string> g = new SimpleGenericClass<string>();
g.Field = "A string";
//...
Console.WriteLine("SimpleGenericClass.Field = \"{0}\"", g.Field);
Console.WriteLine("SimpleGenericClass.Field.GetType() = {0}", g.Field.GetType().FullName);
}
2. Terminology
The following terms are used to discuss generics in .NET:
-
A generic type definition is a class, structure, or interface declaration that functions as a template, with placeholders for the types that it can contain or use. For example, the
System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<TKey,TValue>
class can contain two types: keys and values. Because a generic type definition is only a template, you cannot create instances of a class, structure, or interface that is a generic type definition. -
Generic type parameters, or type parameters, are the placeholders in a generic type or method definition. The
System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<TKey,TValue>
generic type has two type parameters,TKey
andTValue
, that represent the types of its keys and values. -
A constructed generic type, or constructed type, is the result of specifying types for the generic type parameters of a generic type definition.
-
A generic type argument is any type that is substituted for a generic type parameter.
-
The general term generic type includes both constructed types and generic type definitions.
-
Covariance and contravariance of generic type parameters enable you to use constructed generic types whose type arguments are more derived (covariance) or less derived (contravariance) than a target constructed type. Covariance and contravariance are collectively referred to as variance.
-
Constraints are limits placed on generic type parameters. For example, you might limit a type parameter to types that implement the
System.Collections.Generic.IComparer<T>
generic interface, to ensure that instances of the type can be ordered. You can also constrain type parameters to types that have a particular base class, that have a parameterless constructor, or that are reference types or value types. Users of the generic type cannot substitute type arguments that do not satisfy the constraints. -
A generic method definition is a method with two parameter lists: a list of generic type parameters and a list of formal parameters. Type parameters can appear as the return type or as the types of the formal parameters, as the following code shows.
T MyGenericMethod<T>(T arg) { T temp = arg; //... return temp; }
Generic methods can appear on generic or nongeneric types. It’s important to note that a method is not generic just because it belongs to a generic type, or even because it has formal parameters whose types are the generic parameters of the enclosing type. A method is generic only if it has its own list of type parameters. In the following code, only method G is generic.
class A { T G<T>(T arg) { T temp = arg; //... return temp; } } class MyGenericClass<T> { T M(T arg) { T temp = arg; //... return temp; } }
3. Advantages and disadvantages of generics
There are many advantages to using generic collections and delegates:
-
Type safety. Generics shift the burden of type safety from you to the compiler. There is no need to write code to test for the correct data type because it is enforced at compile time. The need for type casting and the possibility of run-time errors are reduced.
-
Less code and code is more easily reused. There is no need to inherit from a base type and override members. For example, the
LinkedList<T>
is ready for immediate use. For example, you can create a linked list of strings with the following variable declaration:LinkedList<string> llist = new LinkedList<string>();
-
Better performance. Generic collection types generally perform better for storing and manipulating value types because there is no need to box the value types.
Boxing is the process of converting a value type to the type object or to any interface type implemented by this value type. When the common language runtime (CLR) boxes a value type, it wraps the value inside a
System.Object
instance and stores it on the managed heap. Unboxing extracts the value type from the object. Boxing is implicit; unboxing is explicit. The concept of boxing and unboxing underlies the C# unified view of the type system in which a value of any type can be treated as an object.Boxing is a specific operation that involves converting a value type to an object reference type. Storing a value type on the heap can happen in various ways, but it’s not always considered boxing. -
Generic delegates enable type-safe callbacks without the need to create multiple delegate classes. For example, the
Predicate<T>
generic delegate allows you to create a method that implements your own search criteria for a particular type and to use your method with methods of theArray
type such asFind
,FindLast
, andFindAll
. -
Generics streamline dynamically generated code. When you use generics with dynamically generated code you do not need to generate the type. This increases the number of scenarios in which you can use lightweight dynamic methods instead of generating entire assemblies.
The following are some limitations of generics:
-
Generic types can be derived from most base classes, such as
MarshalByRefObject
(and constraints can be used to require that generic type parameters derive from base classes likeMarshalByRefObject
). However, .NET does not support context-bound generic types. A generic type can be derived fromContextBoundObject
, but trying to create an instance of that type causes aTypeLoadException
. -
Enumerations cannot have generic type parameters. An enumeration can be generic only incidentally (for example, because it is nested in a generic type that is defined using Visual Basic, C#, or C++).
-
Lightweight dynamic methods cannot be generic.
In Visual Basic, C#, and C++, a nested type that is enclosed in a generic type cannot be instantiated unless types have been assigned to the type parameters of all enclosing types. Another way of saying this is that in reflection, a nested type that is defined using these languages includes the type parameters of all its enclosing types. This allows the type parameters of enclosing types to be used in the member definitions of a nested type.
4. Covariance and contravariance
Liskov’s notion of a behavioural subtype defines a notion of substitutability for objects; that is, if S is a subtype of T, then objects of type T in a program may be replaced with objects of type S without altering any of the desirable properties of that program (e.g. correctness). [3]
Liskov substitution principle imposes some standard requirements on signatures that have been adopted in newer object-oriented programming languages (usually at the level of classes rather than types):
Contravariance of method parameter types in the subtype.
Covariance of method return types in the subtype.
New exceptions cannot be thrown by the methods in the subtype, except if they are subtypes of exceptions thrown by the methods of the supertype.
Covariance and contravariance are terms that refer to the ability to use a more derived type (more specific) or a less derived type (less specific) than originally specified. Generic type parameters support covariance and contravariance to provide greater flexibility in assigning and using generic types. [2]
When you’re referring to a type system, covariance, contravariance, and invariance have the following definitions. The examples assume a base class named Base
and a derived class named Derived
.
-
Covariance
Enables you to use a more derived type than originally specified.
You can assign an instance of
IEnumerable<Derived>
to a variable of typeIEnumerable<Base>
. -
Contravariance
Enables you to use a more generic (less derived) type than originally specified.
You can assign an instance of
Action<Base>
to a variable of typeAction<Derived>
. -
Invariance
Means that you can use only the type originally specified. An invariant generic type parameter is neither covariant nor contravariant.
You cannot assign an instance of
List<Base>
to a variable of typeList<Derived>
or vice versa.
Covariant type parameters enable you to make assignments that look much like ordinary Polymorphism, as shown in the following code.
IEnumerable<Derived> d = new List<Derived>();
IEnumerable<Base> b = d;
Contravariance, on the other hand, seems counterintuitive.
Action<Base> b = (target) => { Console.WriteLine(target.GetType().Name); };
Action<Derived> d = b;
d(new Derived());
In general, a covariant type parameter can be used as the return type of a delegate, and contravariant type parameters can be used as parameter types. For an interface, covariant type parameters can be used as the return types of the interface’s methods, and contravariant type parameters can be used as the parameter types of the interface’s methods.
Covariance and contravariance are collectively referred to as variance. A generic type parameter that is not marked covariant or contravariant is referred to as invariant. A brief summary of facts about variance in the common language runtime:
-
Variant type parameters are restricted to generic interface and generic delegate types.
-
A generic interface or generic delegate type can have both covariant and contravariant type parameters.
-
Variance applies only to reference types; if you specify a value type for a variant type parameter, that type parameter is invariant for the resulting constructed type.
-
Variance does not apply to delegate combination. That is, given two delegates of types
Action<Derived>
andAction<Base>
(Action(Of Derived)
andAction(Of Base)
in Visual Basic), you cannot combine the second delegate with the first although the result would be type safe. Variance allows the second delegate to be assigned to a variable of typeAction<Derived>
, but delegates can combine only if their types match exactly. -
Starting in C# 9, covariant return types are supported. An overriding method can declare a more derived return type the method it overrides, and an overriding, read-only property can declare a more derived type.
abstract class Animal { public abstract Food GetFood(); ... } class Tiger : Animal { public override Meat GetFood() => ...; }
A covariant type parameter is marked with the out
keyword (Out
keyword in Visual Basic).
-
You can use a covariant type parameter as the return value of a method that belongs to an interface, or as the return type of a delegate.
If a method of an interface has a parameter that is a generic delegate type, a covariant type parameter of the interface type can be used to specify a contravariant type parameter of the delegate type.
interface ICovariant<out R> { void DoSomething(Action<R> callback); }
-
You cannot use a covariant type parameter as a generic type constraint for interface methods. [4]
interface ICovariant<out R> { // The following statement generates a compiler error // because you can use only contravariant or invariant types // in generic constraints. // void DoSomething<T>() where T : R; }
A contravariant type parameter is marked with the in
keyword (In
keyword in Visual Basic).
-
You can use a contravariant type parameter as the type of a parameter of a method that belongs to an interface, or as the type of a parameter of a delegate.
-
You can use a contravariant type parameter as a generic type constraint for an interface method.
interface IContravariant<in A> { void SetSomething(A sampleArg); void DoSomething<T>() where T : A; // The following statement generates a compiler error. // A GetSomething(); }
An interface or delegate type can have both covariant and contravariant type parameters.
public delegate TResult Func<in T, out TResult>(T arg)
Only interface types and delegate types can have variant type parameters. |
5. Generics in the runtime
When a generic type or method is compiled into Microsoft intermediate language (MSIL), it contains metadata that identifies it as having type parameters. How the MSIL for a generic type is used differs based on whether the supplied type parameter is a value type or reference type. [5]
When a generic type is first constructed with a value type as a parameter, the runtime creates a specialized generic type with the supplied parameter or parameters substituted in the appropriate locations in the MSIL. Specialized generic types are created one time for each unique value type that is used as a parameter.
However, suppose a different value type as its parameter is created at another point, the runtime generates another version of the generic type and substitutes the type arguments in the appropriate locations in MSIL. Conversions are no longer necessary because each specialized generic class natively contains the value type.
The first time a generic type is constructed with any reference type, the runtime creates a specialized generic type with object references substituted for the parameters in the MSIL. Then, every time that a constructed type is instantiated with a reference type as its parameter, regardless of what type it is, the runtime reuses the previously created specialized version of the generic type. This is possible because all references are the same size.
Because the number of reference types can vary wildly from program to program, the C# implementation of generics greatly reduces the amount of code by reducing to one the number of specialized classes created by the compiler for generic classes of reference types.
Moreover, when a generic C# class is instantiated by using a value type or reference type parameter, reflection can query it at run time and both its actual type and its type parameter can be ascertained.
The runtime creates specific versions of the generic type based on the actual types used to instantiate the generic type. For example, if you have a List<T> and you create a When you instantiate the generic type with a reference type, like However, the .NET CLR maintains type safety by treating these as separate types at the type system level, even though the underlying implementation is the same. |
6. Reflection and Generic Types
From the point of view of reflection, the difference between a generic type and an ordinary type is that a generic type has associated with it a set of type parameters (if it is a generic type definition) or type arguments (if it is a constructed type). A generic method differs from an ordinary method in the same way. [6]
There are two keys to understanding how reflection handles generic types and methods:
-
The type parameters of generic type definitions and generic method definitions are represented by instances of the Type class.
-
If an instance of Type represents a generic type, then it includes an array of types that represent the type parameters (for generic type definitions) or the type arguments (for constructed types). The same is true of an instance of the MethodInfo class that represents a generic method.
A generic type or method is closed if instantiable types have been substituted for all its type parameters, including all the type parameters of all enclosing types. You can only create an instance of a generic type if it is closed. |
WriteLine(typeof(Dictionary<,>));
WriteLine(typeof(MySet<>));
WriteLine(typeof(MySet<int>));
MySet<int> mySet = (MySet<int>)typeof(MySet<int>).GetConstructor([])!.Invoke(null);
mySet.AddRange([1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4]);
mySet.Keys.ToList().ForEach(Console.WriteLine);
static void WriteLine(Type type)
{
string message = string.Format("{0} {1,-31} {2}",
$"IsGenericType: {type.IsGenericType}.",
$"IsGenericTypeDefinition: {type.IsGenericTypeDefinition}.",
$"Open or Closed: {(type.ContainsGenericParameters ? "Open" : "Closed")}.");
Console.WriteLine(message);
}
class MySet<E> : Dictionary<E, bool> where E : notnull
{
public void AddRange(params E[] items) => Array.ForEach(items, Add);
public void Add(E e) { if (ContainsKey(e)) return; Add(e, true); }
}
// $ dotnet run
// IsGenericType: True.IsGenericTypeDefinition: True.Open or Closed: Open.
// IsGenericType: True.IsGenericTypeDefinition: True.Open or Closed: Open.
// IsGenericType: True.IsGenericTypeDefinition: False.Open or Closed: Closed.
// 1
// 2
// 3
// 4
FAQs
Why the value type need NOT to be boxed in a generic collection in .NET?
> Why the value type need NOT to be boxed in a generic collection in .NET? * In .NET, boxing is the process of converting a value type to a reference type, this involves creating a new object on the heap and copying the value into the new object. Unboxing is the reverse process, which can be costly in terms of performance. When using a generic collection, like Generics in .NET use a mechanism called 'reified generics', which means that the system knows the actual types a generic class was instantiated with, even at runtime. It uses this information to directly allocate and deallocate memory for the values in the collection, avoiding the need to box and unbox value types. That’s one of the key benefits of utilizing generics in .NET: they allow you to enforce type safety without incurring the performance cost of boxing and unboxing for value types. |
With reified generics, the mememory would be still allocated on mananged heap?
> With reified generics, the mememory would be still allocated on mananged heap? * Yes, the memory for any object, including those constructed using generic types, is still allocated on the managed heap in .NET. However, the point of difference lies in how these objects are managed. With reference types, an object is created on the heap and a reference to this object is used to access it. Value types, on the other hand, hold their value directly. When value types are used in a generic collection, a consecutive block of memory is allocated on the heap for the collection to store the actual values directly rather than references to the values. This optimization contributes to both the performance speed and reduction of pressure on the garbage collector. The mechanism 'reified generics' helps to keep the information about the specific type that a generic type was instantiated with, and this helps in efficient memory allocation and type safety at runtime. |
References
-
[1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/generics/
-
[2] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/generics/covariance-and-contravariance
-
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liskov_substitution_principle
-
[4] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/programming-guide/concepts/covariance-contravariance/creating-variant-generic-interfaces
-
[5] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/programming-guide/generics/generics-in-the-run-time
-
[6] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/reflection-and-codedom/reflection-and-generic-types