If you do decide you need a comparer, you can certainly use a generalized comparer (see DMenT's answer), but if you need to reuse that logic you should encapsulate it in a dedicated class. You could even declare it by inheriting from the generic base:

This way, you birey implement a test that fails if any properties are added. Of course, you'd have to add new properties to the array at the beginning. Birli using reflection is an expensive operation from a performance point of view, I'd propose to use it in the sınav, derece in the comparer itself if you need to compare lots of objects.

What's the necessary and sufficient condition for a real sequence to be written kakım the self-convolution of another real sequence?

Bir dahaki sefere yorum yapmış olduğumda kullanılmak üzere adımı, e-posta adresimi ve web şehir adresimi bu tarayıcıya kaydet.

Bir çok zeban kabilinden C# da bize enum tasarrufı karınin keyword sağlamlar ve “enum” bizlere özelleştirelebilir enum sınıfları tanımlamımıza yardımcı olabilir.

If you change your class to implement IEquatable instead, the implementation of Distinct (which will use EqualityComparer.Default which in turn sees your type implements IEquatable and delegates to that) will work birli you expect.

The issue here is that comparing floating-point numbers for equality might hamiş work bey expected, due to minute rounding errors. There are different methods of comparing floating-point numbers for near-equality

When you override Equals and GetHashCode you are changing the way the object will determine if it is equals to another. And a note, if you compare C# IEqualityComparer Temel Özellikleri ve Kullanımı objects using C# IEqualityComparer Nasıl Kullanılır == operator it will not have the same behavior bey Equals unless you override the operator bey well.

There are many cases where one might want to have a Dictionary locate objects using something other than 100% equivalence. As a simple example, one may wish C# IEqualityComparer Temel Özellikleri ve Kullanımı to have a dictionary which matches in case-insensitive fashion. One way to accomplish that would be to convert strings to a canonical uppercase form before storing them in the dictionary or performing a lookup. An alternative approach is to supply the dictionary with an IEqualityComparer which will compute hash-codes and check for equality in some sort of case-independent function. There are some circumstances where converting strings to canonical form and using that form whenever possible will be more efficient, but there are others where it's more efficient to only store the string in its original form.

Contravariance enables use to use a less derived type than that specified by the generic parameter. In our case, we could pass in an object instance instead of a Player instance.

On the other hand, if there are several equally reasonable methods of comparing two Ts for equality, IEqualityComparer would seem more appropriate: This interface is derece meant to be implemented by T itself, but by other "external" classes.

One feature I wish .Safi had which would improve the usefulness of such C# IEqualityComparer Kullanımı dictionaries would be a means of requesting the actual key object associated with a given key (so if the dictionary contained the string "WowZo" birli a key, one could look up "wowzo" and get "WowZo"; unfortunately, the only way to retrieve an actual key object, if TValue doesn't contain a redundant reference to it, is to enumerate the entire collection).

Typically I'd write MyCustomeComparer which implements IEqualityComparer C# IEqualityComparer nerelerde kullanılıyor and pass a MyCustomeComparer object around to whichever objects that need it - I'm sure you're aware of this usage.

Important Some information relates to prerelease product that may be substantially modified before it’s released. Microsoft makes no warranties, express or implied, with respect to the information provided here.