 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
.NET Forum / Languages / C# / February 2008Remote object equality
All, Given the two classes below: namspace Namespace1 public class MyClass { public string test1; public string test2; } ......... namespace Namespace2 public class MyClass { public string test1; public string test2; } ........................ static void Main (string[], args) { myClass1 = new Namespace1.MyClass(); myClass2 = new Namespace2.MyClass(); myClass1.test1 = "Test1"; myClass1.test2 = "Test2"; myClass1 = mcClass2; //Problem because of the diffrent namespaces. } How can I set the two equal without iterating through each of the variables setting each equal? A little background, the Namespace2.MyClass object is a remotable object with about one hundred class variables and setting each one, one at a time is making for a somewhat chatty interface. What can I do to set the two objects equal without iterating through the whole class? Thanks for any suggestions. Can you make the class a part of a shared utility library between remote and local so that the classes are really identical? > All, > [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > Thanks for any suggestions. Looch, Well, the objects (unless you have a specific override to Equals which allows it) will NEVER be equal, since they are different types. If you are using one as a facade for the other remotable object, then do as Family Tree Mike says, and use a shared assembly so you can use the same object. If you are not doing that, then you will have to override the Equals method on one of the types to perform your comparison to see if they are "equal". However, this might have an impact on what you are doing now (depending on how the types are used otherwise) and you will also have to override GetHashCode. If you are simply looking to assign the values from one to another, then have another object exposed through remoting (or a method on the original remoted type) which will take the instance of your other object, and then perform the copy in the server and return it back to you.  Signature- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] - mvp@spam.guard.caspershouse.com > All, > [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > Thanks for any suggestions. Thanks both for the replies. I am trying to simply copy the values from one to the other, however I found this on MSDN: "Try to reduce the number of calls used to complete a logical unit of work. The following code shows an example of calling a component, by using a chatty interface. Notice how the inefficient (chatty) interface design forces the caller to traverse the remoting boundary three times to perform the single task of saving customer details. MyComponent.Firstname = "bob"; MyComponent.LastName = "smith"; MyComponent.SaveCustomer(); The following code shows how the same functionality should be implemented to reduce the operations and boundary crossings required to complete the single logical operation. MyComponent.SaveCustomer( "bob", "smith");" The top example is exactly what I'm doing, about a hundred times though and seems to be slowing down this application. I have used the lower example but when the number of paramters grew to about 100, I decided to use an object (Namespace1.MyClass) instead. I could go back to passing parameters. Other than the admin headache, is there any disadvantage to passing 100 parameters? I appreciate the help, thanks again. Looch, No, not really. It's assumed the parameters are going to be smaller than what it would take to remote a full class instance over (since you are breaking it down). The important thing is to reduce the number of calls. Whether you send a class, or 100 parameters, the remoting infrastructure is going to make one call across the network (instead of making 100 calls for setting each property). Signature- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP] - mvp@spam.guard.caspershouse.com > Thanks both for the replies. > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > I appreciate the help, thanks again. Hi, > Thanks both for the replies. > The following code shows how the same functionality should be > implemented to reduce the operations and boundary crossings required > to complete the single logical operation. > > MyComponent.SaveCustomer( "bob", "smith");" It does make sense, you are minimizing the transfer. > The top example is exactly what I'm doing, about a hundred times > though and seems to be slowing down this application. I have used the > lower example but when the number of paramters grew to about 100, I > decided to use an object (Namespace1.MyClass) instead. 100 parameters??? You mean you have a class with 100 properties? I honestly never seen such a class. There might me a better solution tough. If both classes define the same properties and you can use reflection to copied them in a loop. Much better than pass 100 parameters !!! Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.