Suppose I have the following structure in C#
public struct User
{
public string name;
public int ID;
public bool isAlive;
}
and I want to assign all the values for this structure. The only way I know how to do this is through
User Bill;
Bill.ID = 1;
Bill.name = "Bill";
Bill.isAlive = false;
But is there a faster way to do this? Something like
User Bill = {
ID : 1,
name : "Bill",
isAlive : false
};
Yes.
User bill = new User{
ID = 1,
name = "Bill",
isAlive = false
};
Make a constructor for your struct :
public struct User
{
public string name;
public int ID;
public bool isAlive;
public User(string name, int ID, bool isAlive)
{
this.name = name;
this.ID = ID;
this.isAlive = isAlive;
}
}
Then use it for initialization :
User bill = new User("Bill", 1, false);
Structs behave exactly like classes (just that they are a value type), so you could - for instance - use constructors and methods.
While @Somya's answer is correct and works, I tend not to use this construct. IMHO the correct way to do this is to create a constructor for User, that takes the needed parameters, then call new User (1, "Bill", false).
This could easily be considered a spleen.
Suppose you don't have that structure .. you can use anonymous type:
var Bill=new {
ID=1,
name="Bill",
isAlive=false
};
var Gates=new {
ID=2,
name="Gates",
isAlive=true
};
Note the remarks:
If two or more anonymous object initializers in an assembly specify a sequence of properties that are in the same order and that have the same names and types, the compiler treats the objects as instances of the same type. They share the same compiler-generated type information.
Structures are immutable, but an instances of anonymous type is read-only once it's assigned:
Anonymous types provide a convenient way to encapsulate a set of read-only properties into a single object without having to explicitly define a type first. The type name is generated by the compiler and is not available at the source code level. The type of each property is inferred by the compiler.
So you gained both of the benefits with anonymous types.
Usera struct and not a class? There are plenty of good arguments as to why, based on what you've shown here, this should be a class, programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/92339/… for example.