You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I think it is not yet possible what I would like to do. Let's assume I have
public class MyAdder{
public double Add(double a, double b){
return a + b;
}
}
and an interface
public interface ISumCalculater{
double Sum(double value1, double value2);
}
What I would like to be able to do is:
MyAdder adder = new MyAdder();
ISumCalculater calculator = adder.ActLike<ISumCalculater>().MapMethod("Add", "Sum");
double result = calculator.Sum(1.0, 2.0);
So I would like to have the possibility to have different method names in the interface and the implementation and still have the possibility to use ActLike<>. So I could use implementations which are compatible on the 'logical level' (however that should be called), but not on the naming level (which from a functional point of view is secondary; whether I call a car a "car", "voiture" or "автомобиль" does not change its behavior and functionality).
Now my question is whether this (by some way that I overlooked) is already possible in your library. If not then I would be interested to know whether this library could be extended to support that scenario (not only technically but also whether it would fit "the intention" of the library in your opinion).
Potentially this also interesting of course for properties.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi
I think it is not yet possible what I would like to do. Let's assume I have
and an interface
What I would like to be able to do is:
So I would like to have the possibility to have different method names in the interface and the implementation and still have the possibility to use
ActLike<>
. So I could use implementations which are compatible on the 'logical level' (however that should be called), but not on the naming level (which from a functional point of view is secondary; whether I call a car a "car", "voiture" or "автомобиль" does not change its behavior and functionality).Now my question is whether this (by some way that I overlooked) is already possible in your library. If not then I would be interested to know whether this library could be extended to support that scenario (not only technically but also whether it would fit "the intention" of the library in your opinion).
Potentially this also interesting of course for properties.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: