C# generic list initialization?

[scuba264]

I currently have a string array that I need to perform operations on(the contains() method would be very helpful ) and I'd like to use the list structure. Is it possible to initilize a list in VS 2005 with string values in it? I can't get data in without using the add() method.

3.0 apparently would allow:

List<string> stuff = new List<string> { "Entry", "Something", "Another" };

but 2005 won't let me initalize like that. I have a lot of entries and it's silly to add() every one.

I've tried declaring:

List<string>stuff = new List<string>();
stuff = {"this", "that", "other"};

which doesn't work either.


Thanks for any help!

[balabaster]

I currently have a string array that I need to perform operations on(the contains() method would be very helpful ) and I'd like to use the list structure. Is it possible to initilize a list in VS 2005 with string values in it? I can't get data in without using the add() method.

3.0 apparently would allow:

List<string> stuff = new List<string> { "Entry", "Something", "Another" };

but 2005 won't let me initalize like that. I have a lot of entries and it's silly to add() every one.

I've tried declaring:

List<string>stuff = new List<string>();
stuff = {"this", "that", "other"};

which doesn't work either.


Thanks for any help!

VB

Dim sList() As String = {"a", "b", "c"} 
Dim oList As List(Of String)
oList.AddRange(sList)

C#

string[] sList = {"a", "b", "c"}; 
List<string> oList = new List<string>();
List.AddRange(sList);

Hope that helps

[scuba264]

Thanks for the help. I managed to get it to work also as:

string[] myString = {"a", "b", "c"};
List<string> myList = new List<string> (myString);

I'm still interested to hear if theres a way to bypass having to declare a string array and put the data directly into the list if anyone has any input.

Thanks for the quick reply.

[balabaster]

Thanks for the help. I managed to get it to work also as:

string[] myString = {"a", "b", "c"};
List<string> myList = new List<string> (myString);

I'm still interested to hear if theres a way to bypass having to declare a string array and put the data directly into the list if anyone has any input.

Thanks for the quick reply.

I figured it out:
VB

Dim myList As New List(Of String)(New String() {"a","b","c"})

C#

List<string> myList = new List<string>(new string[]{"a","b","c"});

It's not quite as tidy as one might hope - but this is how to do it in one line. Sadly it still requires a string array as the new List<t> doesn't have any overloads that allow for a parameter array which means you have to create an IEnumerable (array in this instance) to pass. But at least the array is an anonymous type now which cuts down on code.

The List<t> class only can only be instanciated with overloads of the following signatures
new List<t>();
new List<t>(int Capacity);
new List<t>(System. Collections.Gen eric.IEnumerabl e(t));

[Plater]

What about:

List<string> stuff = new List<string>(new string[] { "thing1", "thing2", "cat in the hat" });

EDIT: oops, that will teach me to only read the first post before responding.

[balabaster]

What about:

List<string> stuff = new List<string>(new string[] { "thing1", "thing2", "cat in the hat" });

EDIT: oops, that will teach me to only read the first post before responding.

Better late than never Plater ;) A Dr. Seuss fan I see, hehe.

[r035198x]

Thanks for the help. I managed to get it to work also as:

string[] myString = {"a", "b", "c"};
List<string> myList = new List<string> (myString);

I'm still interested to hear if theres a way to bypass having to declare a string array and put the data directly into the list if anyone has any input.

Thanks for the quick reply.

It wouldn't be possible to have such a constructor for List.
What would it look like? Remember it has to be generic as well.

[Plater]

It wouldn't be possible to have such a constructor for List.
What would it look like? Remember it has to be generic as well.

There is, why they didn't include some form of this wrapper I don't know.
Although I suppose making it:
public List<object> MakeList(params object[] items)
defeats the purpose of having a List<T>

public void testing()
{
   List<string> = MakeList("green", "eggs", "and ham");
}
public List<string> MakeList(params string[] items)
{
   return new List<string>(items);
}

[r035198x]

There is, why they didn't include some form of this wrapper I don't know.
Although I suppose making it:
public List<object> MakeList(params object[] items)
defeats the purpose of having a List<T>

public void testing()
{
   List<string> = MakeList("green", "eggs", "and ham");
}
public List<string> MakeList(params string[] items)
{
   return new List<string>(items);
}

you mean MakeList(T[] items), to make it generic? That is covered with the constructor that takes an enumerable. Making it take an array rather limits it a bit since they would need separate ones for other enumerables. It's that case of coding to the Interface rather than to the implementation again.

[Plater]

But I have a heavy dislike of non-indexed enumerables :-P

[r035198x]

But I have a heavy dislike of non-indexed enumerables :-P

Don't get me started on that.
Anyway, I could create my own class and implement the IEnumerable interface and it would work nicely with the .NET list. That's the benefit of coding to the interface.