Multi-key dictionary in c#? [duplicate]

I’ve also used tuples as jason in his answer does. However, I suggest you simply define a tuple as a struct:

public struct Tuple<T1, T2> {
    public readonly T1 Item1;
    public readonly T2 Item2;
    public Tuple(T1 item1, T2 item2) { Item1 = item1; Item2 = item2;} 
}

public static class Tuple { // for type-inference goodness.
    public static Tuple<T1,T2> Create<T1,T2>(T1 item1, T2 item2) { 
        return new Tuple<T1,T2>(item1, item2); 
    }
}

You get immutability, .GetHashcode and .Equals for free, which (while you’re waiting for C# 4.0) is nice ‘n simple…

One warning however: the default GetHashcode implementation (sometimes) only considers the first field so make sure to make the first field the most discriminating or implement GetHashcode yourself (e.g. using FieldwiseHasher.Hash(this) from ValueUtils), otherwise you’ll likely run into scalability issues.

Also, you get to avoid nulls which tend to complicate matters (and if you really want nulls, you just make your Tuple<> nullable). Slightly offtopic, am I the only one annoyed at the framework-level lack of support for non-null references? I work on large project, and occasionally a null creeps in somewhere it really shouldn’t — and hey presto, you get a nullreference exception — but with a stack trace that points you to the reference’s first usage, not the actually faulty code.

Of course, .NET 4.0 is pretty old by now; most of us can just use .NET 4.0’s tuple.

Edit: to workaround the poor GetHashCode implementation that .NET provides for structs I’ve written ValueUtils, which also allows you to use real names for your multi-field keys; that means you might write something like:

sealed class MyValueObject : ValueObject<MyValueObject> {
    public DayOfWeek day;
    public string NamedPart;
    //properties work fine too
}

…which hopefully makes it easier to have human-readable names for data with value semantics, at least until some future version of C# implements proper tuples with named members; hopefully with decent hashcodes ;-).

Leave a Comment