I have a custom class with implement both the ==
and the implicit
for boolean operator.
Is this the correct way to handle all possible, if ==/!= statements and get the expected result? Like this:
public class Foo
{
public bool Result { get; set; }
public static bool operator ==(bool @bool, Foo foo)
{
return Equals(foo, @bool);
}
public static bool operator !=(bool @bool, Foo foo)
{
return NotEquals(foo, @bool);
}
public static bool operator ==(Foo foo, bool @bool)
{
return Equals(foo, @bool);
}
public static bool operator !=(Foo foo, bool @bool)
{
return NotEquals(foo, @bool);
}
public static bool operator ==(Foo foo, Foo fooB)
{
return Equals(foo, fooB);
}
public static bool operator !=(Foo foo, Foo fooB)
{
return NotEquals(foo, fooB);
}
public static implicit operator bool(Foo foo)
{
try { return foo.Result; }
catch { return false; }
}
private static bool Equals(Foo foo, Foo fooB)
{
if (object.Equals(foo, null))
{
if (object.Equals(fooB, null))
return true;
return false;
}
if (object.Equals(fooB, null))
return false;
return foo.Result == fooB.Result;
}
private static bool NotEquals(Foo foo, Foo fooB)
{
if (object.Equals(foo, null))
{
if (object.Equals(fooB, null))
return false;
return true;
}
if (object.Equals(fooB, null))
return true;
return fooB.Result != foo.Result;
}
private static bool Equals(Foo foo, bool @bool)
{
if (object.Equals(foo, null))
return true;
return @bool == foo.Result;
}
private static bool NotEquals(Foo foo, bool @bool)
{
if (object.Equals(foo, null))
return false;
return @bool != foo.Result;
}
}
I am especially wondering about the fact that its seems you really need to implement overloads for either
if (new Foo() != true)
and
if (true != new Foo())
I think you've written too much code :-)
The following is sufficient:
public class Foo
{
public bool Result { get; set; }
public static implicit operator bool(Foo foo)
{
return !object.ReferenceEquals(foo, null) && foo.Result;
}
}
The compiler will then know how to implicitly convert variables of type Foo
into bool
. (And null
will be converted to false
).
So, when you write:
new Foo() == false
The compiler will use the implicit type converter to get a bool
value from Foo
and then use the standard equality operator for bool
.
If we look at the IL that the compiler generates for that expression we find:
newobj instance void FooBool.Foo::.ctor() // new Foo()
call bool FooBool.Foo::op_Implicit(class FooBool.Foo) // implicit operator (Foo => bool)
ldc.i4.0 // false
ceq // equality operator (bool)
Here's a test:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
AssertTrue(new Foo() == false);
AssertTrue(false == new Foo());
AssertFalse(new Foo() != false);
AssertFalse(false != new Foo());
AssertTrue(new Foo { Result = true } == true);
AssertTrue(true == new Foo { Result = true });
AssertFalse(new Foo { Result = true } != true);
AssertFalse(true != new Foo { Result = true });
}
static void AssertTrue(bool value)
{
Console.WriteLine(value ? "ok" : "not ok");
}
static void AssertFalse(bool value)
{
Console.WriteLine(value ? "not ok" : "ok");
}
It prints ok
for each test. So this simplified code should fulfill your needs if I understood them correctly.
UPDATE
To allow the equality operator to work for instances of Foo
(which may be null):
public static bool operator ==(Foo a, Foo b)
{
if (object.ReferenceEquals(a, b))
{
return true;
}
else if (object.ReferenceEquals(a, null))
{
return !b.Result;
}
else if (object.ReferenceEquals(b, null))
{
return !a.Result;
}
else
{
return a.Result == b.Result;
}
}
You should then also implement the inequality operator:
public static bool operator !=(Foo a, Foo b)
{
return !(a == b);
}
And also override GetHashCode
+ Equals
public override int GetHashCode()
{
return this.Result ? 1 : 0;
}
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
if (object.ReferenceEquals(obj, null))
{
return !this.Result;
}
Type t = obj.GetType();
if (t == typeof(Foo))
{
return this.Result == ((Foo)obj).Result;
}
else if (t == typeof(bool))
{
return this.Result == (bool)obj;
}
else
{
return false;
}
}