ChatGPT解决这个技术问题 Extra ChatGPT

What is C# analog of C++ std::pair?

I'm interested: What is C#'s analog of std::pair in C++? I found System.Web.UI.Pair class, but I'd prefer something template-based.

Thank you!

I had the same request a while ago, but the more I thought about it, you may want to just roll your own pairing class, with explicit class types and fields instead of the generic "First" and "Second". It makes your code more readable. A pairing class can be as little as 4 lines, so you aren't saving much by reusing a generic Pair class and your code will be more readable.

P
Pavel

Tuples are available since .NET4.0 and support generics:

Tuple<string, int> t = new Tuple<string, int>("Hello", 4);

In previous versions you can use System.Collections.Generic.KeyValuePair<K, V> or a solution like the following:

public class Pair<T, U> {
    public Pair() {
    }

    public Pair(T first, U second) {
        this.First = first;
        this.Second = second;
    }

    public T First { get; set; }
    public U Second { get; set; }
};

And use it like this:

Pair<String, int> pair = new Pair<String, int>("test", 2);
Console.WriteLine(pair.First);
Console.WriteLine(pair.Second);

This outputs:

test
2

Or even this chained pairs:

Pair<Pair<String, int>, bool> pair = new Pair<Pair<String, int>, bool>();
pair.First = new Pair<String, int>();
pair.First.First = "test";
pair.First.Second = 12;
pair.Second = true;

Console.WriteLine(pair.First.First);
Console.WriteLine(pair.First.Second);
Console.WriteLine(pair.Second);

That outputs:

test
12
true

See my post about adding a Equals method
Tuple<> is now a better solution.
Since type parameters belonging to the generic class cannot be inferred in an object creation expression (constructor call), the authors of BCL made a non-generic helper class called Tuple. Therefore you can say Tuple.Create("Hello", 4) which is a bit easier than new Tuple<string, int>("Hello", 4). (By the way, .NET4.0 is already here since 2010.)
Mind you Tuple<> implements solid Equals and GetHashCode with value semantics which is great. Keep in mind when implementing your own tuples.
This is obviously broken because of Equals and GetHashCode
J
Jay Walker

System.Web.UI contained the Pair class because it was used heavily in ASP.NET 1.1 as an internal ViewState structure.

Update Aug 2017: C# 7.0 / .NET Framework 4.7 provides a syntax to declare a Tuple with named items using the System.ValueTuple struct.

//explicit Item typing
(string Message, int SomeNumber) t = ("Hello", 4);
//or using implicit typing 
var t = (Message:"Hello", SomeNumber:4);

Console.WriteLine("{0} {1}", t.Message, t.SomeNumber);

see MSDN for more syntax examples.

Update Jun 2012: Tuples have been a part of .NET since version 4.0.

Here is an earlier article describing inclusion in.NET4.0 and support for generics:

Tuple<string, int> t = new Tuple<string, int>("Hello", 4);

Note that Tuples are read-only. That is, you can't do this: tuple.Item1 = 4;
Tuples are exactly what I was looking for. Thanks.
K
Konrad Rudolph

Unfortunately, there is none. You can use the System.Collections.Generic.KeyValuePair<K, V> in many situations.

Alternatively, you can use anonymous types to handle tuples, at least locally:

var x = new { First = "x", Second = 42 };

The last alternative is to create an own class.


Just to be clear, anonymous types are also read-only - msdn.
K
Kenan E. K.

C# has tuples as of version 4.0.


J
Jay Walker

Some answers seem just wrong,

you can't use dictionary how would store the pairs (a,b) and (a,c). Pairs concept should not be confused with associative look up of key and values lot of the above code seems suspect

Here is my pair class

public class Pair<X, Y>
{
    private X _x;
    private Y _y;

    public Pair(X first, Y second)
    {
        _x = first;
        _y = second;
    }

    public X first { get { return _x; } }

    public Y second { get { return _y; } }

    public override bool Equals(object obj)
    {
        if (obj == null)
            return false;
        if (obj == this)
            return true;
        Pair<X, Y> other = obj as Pair<X, Y>;
        if (other == null)
            return false;

        return
            (((first == null) && (other.first == null))
                || ((first != null) && first.Equals(other.first)))
              &&
            (((second == null) && (other.second == null))
                || ((second != null) && second.Equals(other.second)));
    }

    public override int GetHashCode()
    {
        int hashcode = 0;
        if (first != null)
            hashcode += first.GetHashCode();
        if (second != null)
            hashcode += second.GetHashCode();

        return hashcode;
    }
}

Here is some test code:

[TestClass]
public class PairTest
{
    [TestMethod]
    public void pairTest()
    {
        string s = "abc";
        Pair<int, string> foo = new Pair<int, string>(10, s);
        Pair<int, string> bar = new Pair<int, string>(10, s);
        Pair<int, string> qux = new Pair<int, string>(20, s);
        Pair<int, int> aaa = new Pair<int, int>(10, 20);

        Assert.IsTrue(10 == foo.first);
        Assert.AreEqual(s, foo.second);
        Assert.AreEqual(foo, bar);
        Assert.IsTrue(foo.GetHashCode() == bar.GetHashCode());
        Assert.IsFalse(foo.Equals(qux));
        Assert.IsFalse(foo.Equals(null));
        Assert.IsFalse(foo.Equals(aaa));

        Pair<string, string> s1 = new Pair<string, string>("a", "b");
        Pair<string, string> s2 = new Pair<string, string>(null, "b");
        Pair<string, string> s3 = new Pair<string, string>("a", null);
        Pair<string, string> s4 = new Pair<string, string>(null, null);
        Assert.IsFalse(s1.Equals(s2));
        Assert.IsFalse(s1.Equals(s3));
        Assert.IsFalse(s1.Equals(s4));
        Assert.IsFalse(s2.Equals(s1));
        Assert.IsFalse(s3.Equals(s1));
        Assert.IsFalse(s2.Equals(s3));
        Assert.IsFalse(s4.Equals(s1));
        Assert.IsFalse(s1.Equals(s4));
    }
}

If you don't implement IEquatable you will get boxing. There is more work to be done to complete your class correctly.
O
OregonGhost

If it's about dictionaries and the like, you're looking for System.Collections.Generic.KeyValuePair.


L
LW001

Apart from custom class or .Net 4.0 Tuples, since C# 7.0 there is a new feature called ValueTuple, which is a struct that can be used in this case. Instead of writing:

Tuple<string, int> t = new Tuple<string, int>("Hello", 4);

and access values through t.Item1 and t.Item2, you can simply do it like that:

(string message, int count) = ("Hello", 4);

or even:

(var message, var count) = ("Hello", 4);

E
Erik Forbes

I created a C# implementation of Tuples, which solves the problem generically for between two and five values - here's the blog post, which contains a link to the source.


G
Grimtron

Depending on what you want to accomplish, you might want to try out KeyValuePair.

The fact that you cannot change the key of an entry can of course be rectified by simply replacing the entire entry by a new instance of KeyValuePair.


佚名

I was asking the same question just now after a quick google I found that There is a pair class in .NET except its in the System.Web.UI ^ ~ ^ (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.ui.pair.aspx) goodness knows why they put it there instead of the collections framework


I know about System.Web.UI.Pair. Wanted generic class though.
System.Web.UI.Pair is sealed. You cannot derive from it (in case you want to adde type safe accessors).
S
Serge Mikhailov

Since .NET 4.0 you have System.Tuple<T1, T2> class:

// pair is implicitly typed local variable (method scope)
var pair = System.Tuple.Create("Current century", 21);

@Alexander, you can easily look into .NET 3.5 docs on Tuple
At the bottom they say: Version Information NET Framework Supported in: 4
@Alexander: OK, right. (Though it left me wondering why did they make this page .NET 3.5-specific)
p
parliament

I typically extend the Tuple class into my own generic wrapper as follows:

public class Statistic<T> : Tuple<string, T>
{
    public Statistic(string name, T value) : base(name, value) { }
    public string Name { get { return this.Item1; } }
    public T Value { get { return this.Item2; } }
}

and use it like so:

public class StatSummary{
      public Statistic<double> NetProfit { get; set; }
      public Statistic<int> NumberOfTrades { get; set; }

      public StatSummary(double totalNetProfit, int numberOfTrades)
      {
          this.TotalNetProfit = new Statistic<double>("Total Net Profit", totalNetProfit);
          this.NumberOfTrades = new Statistic<int>("Number of Trades", numberOfTrades);
      }
}

StatSummary summary = new StatSummary(750.50, 30);
Console.WriteLine("Name: " + summary.NetProfit.Name + "    Value: " + summary.NetProfit.Value);
Console.WriteLine("Name: " + summary.NumberOfTrades.Value + "    Value: " + summary.NumberOfTrades.Value);

A
Andrew Stein

On order to get the above to work (I needed a pair as the key of a dictionary). I had to add:

    public override Boolean Equals(Object o)
    {
        Pair<T, U> that = o as Pair<T, U>;
        if (that == null)
            return false;
        else
            return this.First.Equals(that.First) && this.Second.Equals(that.Second);
    }

and once I did that I also added

    public override Int32 GetHashCode()
    {
        return First.GetHashCode() ^ Second.GetHashCode();
    }

to suppress a compiler warning.


You should find a better hash-code algorithm than that, try using 37+23*(h1+23*(h2+23*(h3+...))) This will make (A,B) distinct from (B,A), ie. reordering will have an effect on the code.
Comment is a accepted.. In my case I was just trying to suppress the compiler waning, and anyway T is a String and U an Int32...
J
James Webster

The PowerCollections library (formerly available from Wintellect but now hosted on Codeplex @ http://powercollections.codeplex.com) has a generic Pair structure.