Make mutable generic collection interfaces implement read-only collection interfaces

[TylerBrinkley]

Rationale

It's long been a source of confusion that the mutable generic collection interfaces don't implement their respective read-only collection interfaces. This was of course due to the read-only collection interfaces being added after the fact and thus would cause breaking changes by changing a published interface API.

With the addition of default interface implementations in C#8/.NET Core 3.0 I think the mutable generic collection interfaces, ICollection<T>, IList<T>, IDictionary<K, V>, and ISet<T> should now implicitly inherit their respective read-only collection interfaces. This can now be done without causing breaking changes.

While it would have been nice for these interfaces to share members, I think the proposed API below is the best we can possibly do with the read-only interfaces being added after the fact.

As an added bonus, this should allow some simplification of the type checking in LINQ code to check for the read-only interfaces instead of the mutable interfaces.

Proposed API

 namespace System.Collections.Generic {
- public interface ICollection<T> : IEnumerable<T> {
+ public interface ICollection<T> : IReadOnlyCollection<T> {
- int Count { get; }
+ new int Count { get; }
+ int IReadOnlyCollection<T>.Count => Count;
 }
- public interface IList<T> : ICollection<T> {
+ public interface IList<T> : ICollection<T>, IReadOnlyList<T> {
- T this[int index] { get; set; }
+ new T this[int index] { get; set; }
+ T IReadOnlyList<T>.this[int index] => this[index];
 }
- public interface IDictionary<TKey, TValue> : ICollection<KeyValuePair<TKey, TValue>> {
+ public interface IDictionary<TKey, TValue> : ICollection<KeyValuePair<TKey, TValue>>, IReadOnlyDictionary<TKey, TValue> {
- TValue this[TKey key] { get; set; }
+ new TValue this[TKey key] { get; set; }
- ICollection<TKey> Keys { get; }
+ new ICollection<TKey> Keys { get; }
- ICollection<TValue> Values { get; }
+ new ICollection<TValue> Values { get; }
- bool ContainsKey(TKey key);
+ new bool ContainsKey(TKey key);
- bool TryGetValue(TKey key, out TValue value);
+ new bool TryGetValue(TKey key, out TValue value);
+ TValue IReadOnlyDictionary<TKey, TValue>.this[TKey key] => this[key];
+ IEnumerable<TKey> IReadOnlyDictionary<TKey, TValue>.Keys => Keys;
+ IEnumerable<TValue> IReadOnlyDictionary<TKey, TValue>.Values => Values;
+ bool IReadOnlyDictionary<TKey, TValue>.ContainsKey(TKey key) => ContainsKey(key);
+ bool IReadOnlyDictionary<TKey, TValue>.TryGetValue(TKey key, out TValue value) => TryGetValue(key, out value);
 }
- public interface ISet<T> : ICollection<T> {
+ public interface ISet<T> : ICollection<T>, IReadOnlySet<T> {
- bool IsProperSubsetOf(IEnumerable<T> other);
+ new bool IsProperSubsetOf(IEnumerable<T> other);
- bool IsProperSupersetOf(IEnumerable<T> other);
+ new bool IsProperSupersetOf(IEnumerable<T> other);
- bool IsSubsetOf(IEnumerable<T> other);
+ new bool IsSubsetOf(IEnumerable<T> other);
- bool IsSupersetOf(IEnumerable<T> other);
+ new bool IsSupersetOf(IEnumerable<T> other);
- bool Overlaps(IEnumerable<T> other);
+ new bool Overlaps(IEnumerable<T> other);
- bool SetEquals(IEnumerable<T> other);
+ new bool SetEquals(IEnumerable<T> other);
// Adding this new member is required so that there's a most specific Contains method on ISet<T> since ICollection<T> and IReadOnlySet<T> define it too
+ new bool Contains(T value) => ((ICollection<T>)this).Contains(value); 
+ bool IReadOnlySet<T>.Contains(T value) => ((ICollection<T>)this).Contains(value);
+ bool IReadOnlySet<T>.IsProperSubsetOf(IEnumerable<T> other) => IsProperSubsetOf(other);
+ bool IReadOnlySet<T>.IsProperSupersetOf(IEnumerable<T> other) => IsProperSupersetOf(other);
+ bool IReadOnlySet<T>.IsSubsetOf(IEnumerable<T> other) => IsSubsetOf(other);
+ bool IReadOnlySet<T>.IsSupersetOf(IEnumerable<T> other) => IsSupersetOf(other);
+ bool IReadOnlySet<T>.Overlaps(IEnumerable<T> other) => Overlaps(other);
+ bool IReadOnlySet<T>.SetEquals(IEnumerable<T> other) => SetEquals(other);
+ }
 }

Binary Compatibility Test

I was able to test that this change doesn't break existing implementers with the following custom interfaces and by simply dropping the new interfaces dll to the publish folder without recompiling the consuming code, the IMyReadOnlyList<T> interface was automatically supported without breaking the code.

Original Interfaces DLL code

namespace InterfaceTest
{
 public interface IMyReadOnlyList<T>
 {
 int Count { get; }
 T this[int index] { get; }
 }

 public interface IMyList<T>
 {
 int Count { get; }
 T this[int index] { get; set; }
 }
}

New Interfaces DLL code

namespace InterfaceTest
{
 public interface IMyReadOnlyList<T>
 {
 int Count { get; }
 T this[int index] { get; }
 }

 public interface IMyList<T> : IMyReadOnlyList<T>
 {
 new int Count { get; }
 new T this[int index] { get; set; }
 int IMyReadOnlyList<T>.Count => Count;
 T IMyReadOnlyList<T>.this[int index] => this[index];
 }
}

Consuming Code

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;

namespace InterfaceTest
{
 class Program
 {
 static void Main()
 {
 var myList = new MyList<int>();
 Console.WriteLine($"MyList<int>.Count: {myList.Count}");
 Console.WriteLine($"IMyList<int>.Count: {((IMyList<int>)myList).Count}");
 Console.WriteLine($"IMyReadOnlyList<int>.Count: {(myList as IMyReadOnlyList<int>)?.Count}");
 Console.WriteLine($"MyList<int>[1]: {myList[1]}");
 Console.WriteLine($"IMyList<int>[1]: {((IMyList<int>)myList)[1]}");
 Console.WriteLine($"IMyReadOnlyList<int>[1]: {(myList as IMyReadOnlyList<int>)?[1]}");
 }
 }

 public class MyList<T> : IMyList<T>
 {
 private readonly List<T> _list = new List<T> { default, default };

 public T this[int index] { get => _list[index]; set => _list[index] = value; }

 public int Count => _list.Count;
 }
}

Original Output

MyList<int>.Count: 2
IMyList<int>.Count: 2
IMyReadOnlyList<int>.Count:
MyList<int>[1]: 0
IMyList<int>[1]: 0
IMyReadOnlyList<int>[1]:

New Output

MyList<int>.Count: 2
IMyList<int>.Count: 2
IMyReadOnlyList<int>.Count: 2
MyList<int>[1]: 0
IMyList<int>[1]: 0
IMyReadOnlyList<int>[1]: 0

Moved from #16151

Updates

• Added ISet<T> implementing IReadOnlySet<T> since Please add interface IReadOnlySet and make HashSet, SortedSet implement it #2293 has been implemented.

[safern]

@terrajobst I would like to have your input on these w.r.t new default implementations and adding new interfaces or new members to interfaces.

[GrabYourPitchforks]

For folks confused as to why this would be a breaking change without default interface implementations, consider three separate assemblies defined as such:

namespace MyClassLib
{
 public interface IFoo
 {
 void PrintHello();
 }
}

namespace MyOtherClassLib
{
 public interface IBar
 {
 void PrintHello();
 }
}

namespace MyApplication
{
 class Program
 {
 static void Main(string[] args)
 {
 object myFoo = MakeNewMyFoo();

 IFoo foo = myFoo as IFoo;
 if (foo is null)
 {
 Console.WriteLine("IFoo not implemented.");
 }
 foo?.PrintHello();

 IBar bar = myFoo as IBar;
 if (bar is null)
 {
 Console.WriteLine("IBar not implemented.");
 }
 bar?.PrintHello();
 }

 [MethodImpl(MethodImplOptions.NoInlining)]
 private static object MakeNewMyFoo()
 {
 return new MyFoo();
 }

 class MyFoo : IFoo
 {
 void IFoo.PrintHello()
 {
 Console.WriteLine("Hello from MyFoo.IFoo.PrintHello!");
 }
 }
 }
}

Compile and run the main application, and you'll see the following output.

Hello from MyFoo.IFoo.PrintHello!
IBar not implemented.

Now change the assembly which contains IFoo to have the following code, and recompile and redeploy that assembly while not recompiling the assembly which contains MyApplication.

namespace MyClassLib
{
 public interface IFoo : IBar
 {
 }
}

The main application will crash upon launch with the following exception.

Unhandled exception. System.MissingMethodException: Method not found: 'Void MyClassLib.IFoo.PrintHello()'.
 at MyApplication.Program.Main(String[] args)

The reason for this is that the method that would normally be at the slot IFoo.PrintHello was removed and instead there's a new method at the slot IBar.PrintHello. However, this now prevents the type loader from loading the previously-compiled MyFoo type, as it's trying to implement an interface method for which there's no longer a method entry on the original interface slot. See https://stackoverflow.com/a/35940240 for further discussion.

As OP points out, adding default interface implementations works around the issue by ensuring that an appropriate method exists in the expected slot.

[TylerBrinkley]

@terrajobst any input on this collection interface change as well?

[TylerBrinkley]

@safern @GrabYourPitchforks @terrajobst Is this something we could get triaged soon? I'd love for this to make it into .NET 5.

[safern]

@eiriktsarpalis and @layomia are the new System.Collections owners so I'll defer to them.

[TylerBrinkley]

@terrajobst

We can't make ISet<T> extend IReadOnlySet<T> (for the same reason that we couldn't do for the other mutable interfaces).

Is this still true even with default interface methods? Does that mean dotnet/corefx#41409 should be closed?

We discussed this. We used to think that that DIMs would work, but when we walked the solution we concluded that it would result commonly in a shard diamond which would result in an ambiguous match. However, this was recently challenged so I think I have to write it down and make sure it's actually working or not working.

Here's a comment @terrajobst had about this in a separate issue, #2293 (comment)

Hoping for some more insight.

[TylerBrinkley]

I updated the proposal to add a Contains DIM to ISet<T> as the current Contains method is defined on ICollection<T> and so if you tried to call Contains on an ISet<T> the call would be ambiguous with the ICollection<T> and IReadOnlySet<T> versions.

The new method would take precedence in this case and it's implementation if not overridden would delegate to ICollection<T>'s implementation as IReadOnlySet<T>'s does. It's not ideal but this is the only incidence of such a solution where this is required for the proposal.

[TylerBrinkley]

As an alternative since IReadOnlySet<T> hasn't released yet, instead of adding another Contains method to the list including ICollection<T>, IReadOnlySet<T>, and now ISet<T> we could instead add an invariant read-only collection interface as proposed in #30661 and have it implement a Contains method and then have IReadOnlySet<T> implement this new invariant interface and remove it's Contains method.

With that change then ICollection<T> could implement this new invariant read-only collection interface.

So instead of this.

namespace System.Collections.Generic {
 public interface ICollection<T> : IReadOnlyCollection<T> {
 bool Contains(T value);
 ...
 }
 public interface IReadOnlySet<T> : IReadOnlyCollection<T> {
 bool Contains(T value);
 ...
 }
 public interface ISet<T> : IReadOnlySet<T> {
 new bool Contains(T value) => ((ICollection<T>)this).Contains(value);
 bool ICollection<T>.Contains(T value);
 bool IReadOnlySet<T>.Contains(T value) => ((ICollection<T>)this).Contains(value);
 ...
 }
}

it would be this.

namespace System.Collections.Generic {
 public interface IReadOnlyCollectionInvariant<T> : IReadOnlyCollection<T> {
 bool Contains(T value);
 ...
 }
 public interface ICollection<T> : IReadOnlyCollectionInvariant<T> {
 new bool Contains(T value);
 bool IReadOnlyCollectionInvariant<T>.Contains(T value) => Contains(value);
 ...
 }
 public interface IReadOnlySet<T> : IReadOnlyCollectionInvariant<T> {
 ...
 }
}