What's the best way to call a generic method when the type parameter isn't known at compile time, but instead is obtained dynamically at runtime? Consider the following sample code - …

Apr 30, 2014 · Generic is the opposite of specific. Generic and specific refer to the identification of a fact. Specific means a fact that has been specified. If you ask for (specify) a pain reliever, …

Mar 24, 2014 · You can certainly define generic delegates, after all, that's exactly what Func and Action are. They are treated as generic definitions, just like generic interfaces and classes are. …

Oct 16, 2008 · The type 'int?' must be a non-nullable value type in order to use it as parameter 'T' in the generic type or method Is specifying a nullable type as a generic parameter at all possible?

Mar 26, 2015 · Note about the placing of the function parameter list When using a Generic() to select a function based on the controlling-expression you have the choice of including the …

I have a generics class, Foo<T>. In a method of Foo, I want to get the class instance of type T, but I just can't call T.class. What is the preferred way to get around it using T.class?

So, two questions: Why do we observe this weird behaviour? What keeps us from comparing the values of generic types which are known to be IComparable? Doesn't it somehow defeat the …

I think the problem with this is that if you're using this generic method to say, convert a Database object from DbNull to Int and it returns default (T) where T is an int, it'll return 0. If this number …

Jan 27, 2010 · I am trying to combine a bunch of similar methods into a generic method. I have several methods that return the value of a querystring, or null if that querystring does not exist …

Feb 11, 2015 · The point about generic types, is that although you may not know them at "coding time", the compiler needs to be able to resolve them at compile time. Why? Because under the …