Edit Question - KnowledgeHub

Title Body

I have often wanted to create a list of objects where each object must implement a number of interfaces. For example, I'd like to do something similar to the following: List<T> where T : IConvertible, IComparable _myList; Another option I considered was to create a third interface that implements these two so that any object that implements these two interfaces inherently implements mine. public interface IConvertibleAndComparable : IConvertible, IComparable { } List<IConvertibleAndComparable> _myList; With this I would be able to add any object that implements both IConvertible and IComparable , including double and int , as well as my own objects. Explicitly implementing IConvertibleAndComparable is not required since it does not add any new functionality beyond the interfaces in inherits. I understand that the first snippet is illegal and the second, while legal, does not do what I want. Is it possible to achieve what I am trying to do? If not, would either of these be a candidate for a future C# feature? (Note: This would be legitimate application for empty interfaces.) Edit In a more general sense, I'd like to perform one of the following: private MyGenericClass<T> where T : IA, IB, ... _myClass; where I can declare all of the restrictions on T that I need, or public interface IMyCombinedInterface : IA, IB, ... {} private MyGenericClass<IMyCombinedInterface> _myClass; where any type that implements IA , IB , and ... inherently (or implicitly) implements IMyCombinedInterface (only when IMyCombinedInterface doesn't explicitly declare new functionality).

Tags (comma-separated) Cancel