1 out of 6 rated this helpful - Rate this topic

IEqualityComparer<T> Interface

Defines methods to support the comparison of objects for equality.

Namespace:  System.Collections.Generic
Assembly:  mscorlib (in mscorlib.dll)
public interface IEqualityComparer<in T>

Type Parameters

in T

The type of objects to compare.

This type parameter is contravariant. That is, you can use either the type you specified or any type that is less derived. For more information about covariance and contravariance, see Covariance and Contravariance in Generics.

The IEqualityComparer<T> type exposes the following members.

  Name Description
Public method Supported by the XNA Framework Supported by Portable Class Library Equals Determines whether the specified objects are equal.
Public method Supported by the XNA Framework Supported by Portable Class Library GetHashCode Returns a hash code for the specified object.
Top

This interface allows the implementation of customized equality comparison for collections. That is, you can create your own definition of equality for type T, and specify that this definition be used with a collection type that accepts the IEqualityComparer<T> generic interface. In the .NET Framework, constructors of the Dictionary<TKey, TValue> generic collection type accept this interface.

A default implementation of this interface is provided by the Default property of the EqualityComparer<T> generic class. The StringComparer class implements IEqualityComparer<T> of type String.

This interface supports only equality comparisons. Customization of comparisons for sorting and ordering is provided by the IComparer<T> generic interface.

We recommend that you derive from the EqualityComparer<T> class instead of implementing the IEqualityComparer<T> interface, because the EqualityComparer<T> class tests for equality using the IEquatable<T>.Equals method instead of the Object.Equals method. This is consistent with the Contains, IndexOf, LastIndexOf, and Remove methods of the Dictionary<TKey, TValue> class and other generic collections.

The following example adds custom Box objects to a dictionary collection. The Box objects are considered equal if their dimensions are the same.


using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
class Example
{
    static void Main()
    {
        try
        {

            BoxEqualityComparer boxEqC = new BoxEqualityComparer();

            Dictionary<Box, String> boxes = new Dictionary<Box,
                                                string>(boxEqC);

            Box redBox = new Box(4, 3, 4);
            Box blueBox = new Box(4, 3, 4);

            boxes.Add(redBox, "red");
            boxes.Add(blueBox, "blue");

            Console.WriteLine(redBox.GetHashCode());
            Console.WriteLine(blueBox.GetHashCode());
        }
        catch (ArgumentException argEx)
        {

            Console.WriteLine(argEx.Message);
        }
    }
}

public class Box
{
    public Box(int h,  int l, int w)
    {
        this.Height = h;
        this.Length = l;
        this.Width = w;
    }
    public int Height { get; set; }
    public int Length { get; set; }
    public int Width { get; set; }
}


class BoxEqualityComparer : IEqualityComparer<Box>
{

    public bool Equals(Box b1, Box b2)
    {
        if (b1.Height == b2.Height & b1.Length == b2.Length
                            & b1.Width == b2.Width)
        {
            return true;
        }
        else
        {
            return false;
        }
    }


    public int GetHashCode(Box bx)
    {
        int hCode = bx.Height ^ bx.Length ^ bx.Width;
        return hCode.GetHashCode();
    }

}





.NET Framework

Supported in: 4, 3.5, 3.0, 2.0

.NET Framework Client Profile

Supported in: 4, 3.5 SP1

Portable Class Library

Supported in: Portable Class Library

Windows 7, Windows Vista SP1 or later, Windows XP SP3, Windows XP SP2 x64 Edition, Windows Server 2008 (Server Core not supported), Windows Server 2008 R2 (Server Core supported with SP1 or later), Windows Server 2003 SP2

The .NET Framework does not support all versions of every platform. For a list of the supported versions, see .NET Framework System Requirements.
Did you find this helpful?
(1500 characters remaining)
Community Content Add
Annotations FAQ
Sample throws - Argument Exception
When trying to add the BlueBox i.e. boxes.Add(blueBox, "blue"); sample throws an exception saying - An item with the same key has already been added.
Hash based collections and comparable interface (earlier versions of .NET)
To work properly in a hashable context, it is a basic rule that if two items are equal (or equivalent) then their hash values must be  the same. Therefore, one needs to implement an override of T.GetHashCode() as part of implementing any form of IEqualityComparer<> or IComparer<> interface. This should have been a requirement of the interfaces and the hashable collection types. This would seem to be an issue in the .NET framework design.
Clarification on derivation from EqualityComparer<T>
"We recommend that you derive from the EqualityComparer<T> class instead of implementing the IEqualityComparer<T> 
interface, because the EqualityComparer<T> class tests for equality using the IEquatable<T>.Equals method
instead of the Object.Equals method."

This is really vague since both methods of the IEqualityComparer<T> interface are marked abstract. They both don't have a "default" implementation and you would have to override it anyway. If anything, the "reasoning" they've provided here sound more like a guideline of what your comparers could do and is irrelevant to what it actually does.

Looking at the public/protected interface of the EqualityComparer<T> class, there's only one redeeming quality, it implements the non-generic IEqualityComparer interface. I think what they meant to say that they recommend it because EqualityComparer<T> actually implements the non-generic IEqualityComparer interface that way your class may be used where the non-generic comparer is required.

More here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5707347/preferring-equalitycomparert-to-iequalitycomparert

Logical AND vs Conditional AND
I don't understand the use of the Logical AND rather than the Conditional AND operator in the equality check. $0$0 $0 $0If the boxes are to be considered the same only if all their dimensions are equal then Logical and makes little sense.$0 $0$0 $0 $0That is, if b1.Height != b2.Height then there is no need to check the other dimensions as well.$0 $0$0 $0 $0i.e.  I think... $0 $0$0 $0 $0b1.Height == b2.Height & b1.Length == b2.Length & b1.Width == b2.Width$0 $0$0 $0 $0Should be... $0 $0$0 $0 $0(b1.Height == b2.Height) && (b1.Length == b2.Length) && (b1.Width == b2.Width)$0
I think that's the point
Isn't?
  • 10/28/2010
  • jls
Example needs updating
"We recommend that you derive from the EqualityComparer<T> class instead of implementing the IEqualityComparer<T> interface"


Great advice. How about making examples that follows your own advice? ;-)
Example throws an exception
The C# example will throw an exception when it tries to add the second box to the dictionary collection because the keys are the same.