有几种常见的模式可以用于在公共API中返回函数调用的结果。哪一种是最佳实践并不明显。是否有普遍共识或者说令人信服的理由，说明为什么其中一种模式比其他模式更好呢？
更新：通过公共API，我指的是暴露给依赖程序集的公共成员。我不仅仅是指作为Web服务公开的API。我们可以假设客户端正在使用.NET。
下面我写了一个示例类来说明不同的返回值模式，并且我已经注释了每个模式表达我的担忧。
这是一个有点长的问题，但我相信我不是唯一考虑过这个问题的人，希望这个问题对其他人也有趣。
更新：通过公共API，我指的是暴露给依赖程序集的公共成员。我不仅仅是指作为Web服务公开的API。我们可以假设客户端正在使用.NET。
下面我写了一个示例类来说明不同的返回值模式，并且我已经注释了每个模式表达我的担忧。
这是一个有点长的问题，但我相信我不是唯一考虑过这个问题的人，希望这个问题对其他人也有趣。
public class PublicApi<T> // I am using the class constraint on T, because
where T: class // I already understand that using out parameters
{ // on ValueTypes is discouraged (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms182131.aspx)
private readonly Func<object, bool> _validate;
private readonly Func<object, T> _getMethod;
public PublicApi(Func<object,bool> validate, Func<object,T> getMethod)
{
if(validate== null)
{
throw new ArgumentNullException("validate");
}
if(getMethod== null)
{
throw new ArgumentNullException("getMethod");
}
_validate = validate;
_getMethod = getMethod;
}
// This is the most intuitive signature, but it is unclear
// if the function worked as intended, so the caller has to
// validate that the function worked, which can complicates
// the client's code, and possibly cause code repetition if
// the validation occurs from within the API's method call.
// It also may be unclear to the client whether or not this
// method will cause exceptions.
public T Get(object argument)
{
if(_validate(argument))
{
return _getMethod(argument);
}
throw new InvalidOperationException("Invalid argument.");
}
// This fixes some of the problems in the previous method, but
// introduces an out parameter, which can be controversial.
// It also seems to imply that the method will not every throw
// an exception, and I'm not certain in what conditions that
// implication is a good idea.
public bool TryGet(object argument, out T entity)
{
if(_validate(argument))
{
entity = _getMethod(argument);
return true;
}
entity = null;
return false;
}
// This is like the last one, but introduces a second out parameter to make
// any potential exceptions explicit.
public bool TryGet(object argument, out T entity, out Exception exception)
{
try
{
if (_validate(argument))
{
entity = _getMethod(argument);
exception = null;
return true;
}
entity = null;
exception = null; // It doesn't seem appropriate to throw an exception here
return false;
}
catch(Exception ex)
{
entity = null;
exception = ex;
return false;
}
}
// The idea here is the same as the "bool TryGet(object argument, out T entity)"
// method, but because of the Tuple class does not rely on an out parameter.
public Tuple<T,bool> GetTuple(object argument)
{
//equivalent to:
T entity;
bool success = this.TryGet(argument, out entity);
return Tuple.Create(entity, success);
}
// The same as the last but with an explicit exception
public Tuple<T,bool,Exception> GetTupleWithException(object argument)
{
//equivalent to:
T entity;
Exception exception;
bool success = this.TryGet(argument, out entity, out exception);
return Tuple.Create(entity, success, exception);
}
// A pattern I end up using is to have a generic result class
// My concern is that this may be "over-engineering" a simple
// method call. I put the interface and sample implementation below
public IResult<T> GetResult(object argument)
{
//equivalent to:
var tuple = this.GetTupleWithException(argument);
return new ApiResult<T>(tuple.Item1, tuple.Item2, tuple.Item3);
}
}
// the result interface
public interface IResult<T>
{
bool Success { get; }
T ReturnValue { get; }
Exception Exception { get; }
}
// a sample result implementation
public class ApiResult<T> : IResult<T>
{
private readonly bool _success;
private readonly T _returnValue;
private readonly Exception _exception;
public ApiResult(T returnValue, bool success, Exception exception)
{
_returnValue = returnValue;
_success = success;
_exception = exception;
}
public bool Success
{
get { return _success; }
}
public T ReturnValue
{
get { return _returnValue; }
}
public Exception Exception
{
get { return _exception; }
}
}
Result<T>类，但具有自定义的相等运算符/重载和双向隐式转换运算符以便于使用。 - smartcaveman