Is it possible to assign a base class object to a

Question

Is it possible to assign a base class object to a derived class reference with an explicit typecast in C#?.

I have tried it and it creates a run-time error.

Answer 1

I know this is old but I've used this successfully for quite a while.

   private void PopulateDerivedFromBase<TB,TD>(TB baseclass,TD derivedclass)
    {
        //get our baseclass properties
        var bprops = baseclass.GetType().GetProperties();
        foreach (var bprop in bprops)
        {
            //get the corresponding property in the derived class
            var dprop = derivedclass.GetType().GetProperty(bprop.Name);
            //if the derived property exists and it's writable, set the value
            if (dprop != null && dprop.CanWrite)
                dprop.SetValue(derivedclass,bprop.GetValue(baseclass, null),null);
        }
    } 

Answer 2

You can do this using generic.

public class BaseClass
{
    public int A { get; set; }
    public int B { get; set; }
    private T ConvertTo<T>() where T : BaseClass, new()
    {
         return new T
         {
             A = A,
             B = B
         }
    }

    public DerivedClass1 ConvertToDerivedClass1()
    {
         return ConvertTo<DerivedClass1>();
    }

    public DerivedClass2 ConvertToDerivedClass2()
    {
         return ConvertTo<DerivedClass2>();
    }
}

public class DerivedClass1 : BaseClass
{
    public int C { get; set; }
}

public class DerivedClass2 : BaseClass
{
    public int D { get; set; }
}

You get three benefits using this approach.

1. You are not duplicating the code
2. You are not using reflection (which is slow)
3. All of your conversions are in one place

Answer 3

No it is not possible, hence your runtime error.

But you can assign an instance of a derived class to a variable of base class type.

Answer 4

As many others have answered, No.

I use the following code on those unfortunate occasions when I need to use a base type as a derived type. Yes it is a violation of the Liskov Substitution Principle (LSP) and yes most of the time we favor composition over inheritance. Props to Markus Knappen Johansson whose original answer this is based upon.

This code in the base class:

    public T As<T>()
    {
        var type = typeof(T);
        var instance = Activator.CreateInstance(type);

        if (type.BaseType != null)
        {
            var properties = type.BaseType.GetProperties();
            foreach (var property in properties)
                if (property.CanWrite)
                    property.SetValue(instance, property.GetValue(this, null), null);
        }

        return (T) instance;
    }

Allows:

    derivedObject = baseObect.As<derivedType>()

Since it uses reflection, it is "expensive". Use accordingly.

Answer 5

Is it possible to assign a base class object to a derived class reference with an explicit typecast in C#?.

Not only explicit, but also implicit conversions are possible.

C# language doesn't permit such conversion operators, but you can still write them using pure C# and they work. Note that the class which defines the implicit conversion operator (Derived) and the class which uses the operator (Program) must be defined in separate assemblies (e.g. the Derived class is in a library.dll which is referenced by program.exe containing the Program class).

//In library.dll:
public class Base { }

public class Derived {
    [System.Runtime.CompilerServices.SpecialName]
    public static Derived op_Implicit(Base a) {
        return new Derived(a); //Write some Base -> Derived conversion code here
    }

    [System.Runtime.CompilerServices.SpecialName]
    public static Derived op_Explicit(Base a) {
        return new Derived(a); //Write some Base -> Derived conversion code here
    }
}

//In program.exe:
class Program {
    static void Main(string[] args) {
        Derived z = new Base(); //Visual Studio can show squiggles here, but it compiles just fine.
    }
}

When you reference the library using the Project Reference in Visual Studio, VS shows squiggles when you use the implicit conversion, but it compiles just fine. If you just reference the library.dll, there are no squiggles.

Answer 6

Another solution is to add extension method like so:

 public static void CopyProperties(this object destinationObject, object sourceObject, bool overwriteAll = true)
        {
            try
            {
                if (sourceObject != null)
                {
                    PropertyInfo[] sourceProps = sourceObject.GetType().GetProperties();
                    List<string> sourcePropNames = sourceProps.Select(p => p.Name).ToList();
                    foreach (PropertyInfo pi in destinationObject.GetType().GetProperties())
                    {
                        if (sourcePropNames.Contains(pi.Name))
                        {
                            PropertyInfo sourceProp = sourceProps.First(srcProp => srcProp.Name == pi.Name);
                            if (sourceProp.PropertyType == pi.PropertyType)
                                if (overwriteAll || pi.GetValue(destinationObject, null) == null)
                                {
                                    pi.SetValue(destinationObject, sourceProp.GetValue(sourceObject, null), null);
                                }
                        }
                    }
                }
            }
            catch (ApplicationException ex)
            {
                throw;
            }
        }

then have a constructor in each derived class that accepts base class:

  public class DerivedClass: BaseClass
    { 
        public DerivedClass(BaseClass baseModel)
        {
            this.CopyProperties(baseModel);
        }
    }

It will also optionally overwrite destination properties if already set (not null) or not.