Apr 30, 2014 · Generic is the opposite of specific. Generic and specific refer to the identification of a fact. Specific means a fact that has been specified. If you ask for (specify) a pain reliever, aspirin would …

In case you happen to have a generic method that returns a generic value but doesn't have generic parameters, you can use default(T) + (T)(object) cast, together with C# 8 pattern matching/type …

In particular, we wouldn't need both the Func<T> and Action<T> families - there'd just be Func<void> instead of Action, Func<T, void> instead of Action<T> etc. It would also make async simpler - there'd …

Jul 8, 2009 · The generic parameter type will be the same for all methods, so I would like it at the class level. I know I could make a generic version and then inherit from it for the int version, but I was just …

Static generic methods allow type-inference to make usage really easy; static fields on generic classes allow virtually overhead-free storage of (meta)data. It wouldn't surprise me at all if ORM's like Dapper …

Mar 24, 2014 · You can certainly define generic delegates, after all, that's exactly what Func and Action are. They are treated as generic definitions, just like generic interfaces and classes are. However, …

What keeps us from comparing the values of generic types which are known to be IComparable? Doesn't it somehow defeat the entire purpose of generic constraints?

Aug 4, 2010 · 0 If you cannot change the generic class and use one of the method already explained on this page, then simple approach would be to get the type class based on the runtime instance class …

Feb 11, 2015 · The point about generic types, is that although you may not know them at "coding time", the compiler needs to be able to resolve them at compile time. Why? Because under the hood, the …

This appears to address the question of whether the type is a list-y sort of thing, but the question is more about how to determine what generic type parameter a type that is known to be a List already was …