.NET EventHandlers - Generic or no?

Posted by Chris Marasti-Georg on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by Chris Marasti-Georg
Published on 2008-09-24T19:50:41Z Indexed on 2010/04/12 8:43 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 487

Filed under:
|
|
|

Every time I start in deep in a C# project, I end up with lots of events that really just need to pass a single item. I stick with the EventHandler/EventArgs practice, but what I like to do is have something like:

public delegate void EventHandler<T>(object src, EventArgs<T> args);

public class EventArgs<T>: EventArgs {

  private T item;

  public EventArgs(T item) {
    this.item = item;
  }

  public T Item {
    get { return item; }
  }
}

Later, I can have my

public event EventHandler<Foo> FooChanged;

public event EventHandler<Bar> BarChanged;

However, it seems that the standard for .NET is to create a new delegate and EventArgs subclass for each type of event. Is there something wrong with my generic approach?


EDIT: The reason for this post is that I just re-created this in a new project, and wanted to make sure it was ok. Actually, I was re-creating it as I posted. I found that there is a generic EventHandler<TEventArgs>, so you don't need to create the generic delegate, but you still need the generic EventArgs<T> class, because TEventArgs: EventArgs.
Another EDIT: One downside (to me) of the built-in solution is the extra verbosity:

public event EventHandler<EventArgs<Foo>> FooChanged;

vs.

public event EventHandler<Foo> FooChanged;

It can be a pain for clients to register for your events though, because the System namespace is imported by default, so they have to manually seek out your namespace, even with a fancy tool like Resharper... Anyone have any ideas pertaining to that?

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about c#

Related posts about .NET