在 child class 中获得正确实现的重载的正确方法

Proper way to get the right implemented overload in a child class

先介绍一下我在做什么

在 Unity 中,我想让一些 GameObjects(比如玩家)能够拾取物品(其他 GameObjects)。

为了做到这一点,我设计了这个基本代码:

拉取物品的组件:

public class PickupMagnet : MonoBehaviour
{   
    // [...]
    private void Update()
    {
        Transform item = FindClosestItemInRange(); // Well, this line doesn't exist, it's just a simplification.
            if (ítem != null)
             Pickup(item);
    }

    private void Pickup(Transform item)
    {
        IPickup pickup = item.GetComponent<IPickup>();
        if (pickup != null)
        {
            pickup.Pickup();
            Destroy(item);
        }
    }   
}

那些(目前)项目的界面:

public interface IPickup
{
    void Pickup();
    // [...]
}

以及我当时做的单品:

public class Coin : MonoBehaviour, IPickup
{
    private int price;
    // [...]

    void IPickup.Pickup()
    {
        Global.money += price; // Increase player money
    }   
    // [...]
}

一切正常,直到我想添加一个新项目:健康包。这个项目,增加捡起它的生物的生命值。但为了做到这一点,我需要生物脚本的实例:LivingObject.

public class HealthPack: MonoBehaviour, IPickup
{
    private int healthRestored;
    // [...]

    void IPickup.Pickup(LivingObject livingObject)
    {
        livingObject.TakeHealing(healthRestored);
    }   
    // [...]
}

问题是 IPickup.Pickup() 没有任何参数。显然,我可以将其更改为 IPickup.Pickup(LivingObject livingObject) 并忽略 Coin.Pickup 上的参数,但如果将来我想添加更多种类的项目,需要不同的参数怎么办? 其他选择是向接口添加一个新方法,但这迫使我实现 Coin.Pickup(LivingObject livingObject) 并实现它。

想了想把IPickup去掉,换成:

public abstract class Pickupable : MonoBehaviour
{
    // [...]
    public abstract bool ShouldBeDestroyedOnPickup { get; }
    public virtual void Pickup() => throw new NotImplementedException();
    public virtual void Pickup(LivingObject livingObject) => throw new NotImplementedException();
}

然后覆盖 CoinHealthPack 中的必要方法。另外,我将 PickupMagnet.Pickup(Transform item) 更改为:

public class PickupMagnet : MonoBehaviour
{
    // [...]
    private LivingObject livingObject;

    private void Start()
    {
        livingObject = gameObject.GetComponent<LivingObject>();
    }
    // [...]
    private void Pickup(Transform item)
    {
        Pickupable pickup = item.GetComponent<Pickupable>();
        if (pickup != null)
        {
            Action[] actions = new Action[] { pickup.Pickup, () => pickup.Pickup(livingObject) };
            bool hasFoundImplementedMethod = false;
            foreach (Action action in actions)
            {
                try
                {
                    action();
                    hasFoundImplementedMethod = true;
                    break;
                }
                catch (NotImplementedException) { }
            }

            if (!hasFoundImplementedMethod)
                throw new NotImplementedException($"The {item.gameObject}'s {nameof(Pickup)} class lack of any Pickup method implementation.");
            else if (pickup.ShouldBeDestroyedOnPickup)
                Destroy(item.gameObject);
        }
    }
}

基本上,这会遍历 actions 中定义的所有方法并执行它们。如果他们提出 NotImplementedException 它会继续尝试数组中的其他方法。

此代码运行良好,但就我个人而言,我不喜欢在 Pickable.Pickup.

的每次重载中定义该数组的想法

所以,我开始做一些研究,我发现了一个叫做 "reflection" 的东西。我仍然不确定它是如何工作的,但我设法编写了这个工作代码。

private void Pickup(Transform item)
{
    Pickupable pickup = item.GetComponent<Pickupable>();
    if (pickup != null)
    {
        bool hasFoundImplementedMethod = false;
        foreach (MethodInfo method in typeof(Pickupable).GetMethods(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.DeclaredOnly))
        {
            if (method.Name == "Pickup")
            {
                ParameterInfo[] parametersGetted = method.GetParameters();
                int parametersAmount = parametersGetted.Length;                    
                object[] parametersObjects = new object[parametersAmount ];
                for (int i = 0; i < parametersAmount; i++)
                {
                    Type parameterType = parametersGetted[i].ParameterType;
                    if (parameters.TryGetValue(parameterType, out object parameterObject))
                        parametersObjects[i] = parameterObject;
                    else
                        throw new KeyNotFoundException($"The key Type {parameterType} was not found in the {nameof(parameters)} dictionary.");
                }
                bool succed = TryCatchInvoke(pickup, method, parametersObjects);
                if (succed) hasFoundImplementedMethod = true;                    
            }
        }

        if (!hasFoundImplementedMethod)
            throw new NotImplementedException($"The {item.gameObject}'s {nameof(Pickup)} class lack of any Pickup method implementation.");
        else if (pickup.ShouldBeDestroyedOnPickup)
            Destroy(item.gameObject);
    }
}

private bool TryCatchInvoke(Pickupable instance, MethodInfo method, object[] args)
{
    try
    {
        method.Invoke(instance, args);
        return true;
    }
    catch (Exception) // NotImplementedException doesn't work...
    {
        return false;
    }
}

并添加到 MagnetPickup:

private LivingObject livingObject;
private Dictionary<Type, object> parameters;

private void Start()
{
    livingObject = gameObject.GetComponent<LivingObject>();
    parameters = new Dictionary<Type, object> { { typeof(LivingObject), livingObject } };
}

...并且有效。

我对 Unity profiler 不是很熟悉,但我认为最后的代码运行速度有点快(不到 1%)。

问题是我不确定该代码将来是否会给我带来问题,所以这是我的问题:反射是解决这个问题的正确方法还是我应该使用我的try/catch 尝试或其他代码?

对于仅仅 1% 我不确定我是否应该冒险使用它。我不是在寻找最好的性能,只是在寻找解决这个问题的正确方法。

我确实认为这样做的最佳方法是在 Pickup 中发送对 Player 对象的引用,然后针对每种类型的 Pickup 对象执行自定义逻辑。我可能会跳过界面,只拥有一个名为 "PickupObject" 或其他名称的基础对象,然后让 FindClosestItemInRange return those.

最后,您应该销毁 GameObject,而不是您传递给 Pickup 函数的任何东西。您可能可以销毁 Transform 并获得相同的结果(我没有尝试过),但实际上销毁 GameObject 而不是 GameObject 的任何组件只是一个好习惯

public class PickupObject : MonoBehaviour
{
    virtual void Pickup(Player playerObject) { }
}

public class Coin : PickupObject 
{
    public int price;
    override void Pickup(Player playerObject)
    {
        playerObject.money += price; // Move money over to the player as it probably makes more sense
    }
}
public class HealthPack : PickupObject 
{
    public int healthRestored;
    override void Pickup(Player playerObject)
    {
        playerObject.health += healthRestored;
    }
}

public class PickupMagnet : MonoBehaviour
{   
    public Player PlayerObject;
    private void Update()
    {
        PickupObject item = FindClosestItemInRange();
        Pickup(item);
    }

    private void Pickup(PickupObject pickup)
    {
            pickup.Pickup(PlayerObject);
            Destroy(pickup.gameObject);
    }   
}

编辑,关于您的代码的一些一般想法:

如果您的通用 "LivingObject" 可以像您的代码建议的那样同时获取生命值和金币,那么您可能过于通用了。听起来你只是有一个需要拾取东西的玩家。让 "anything" 能够拾取 "anything" 以我的经验来说太笼统了。不要试图在第一行代码中解决所有未来的问题。如果你不确定你要去哪里,或者在这个早期阶段结构很棘手。编写执行您需要它执行的操作的代码,并在出现模式和重复时重构它。