Is this the fastest way to update a property using reflection? Assume the property is always an int:
PropertyInfo counterPropertyInfo = GetProperty();
int value = (int)counterPropertyInfo.GetValue(this, null);
counterPropertyInfo.SetValue(this, value + 1, null);
I did some benchmarking here when you know the type arguments (a non generic approach wont be very different). CreateDelegate would be the fastest approach for a property if you can't directly access it. With CreateDelegate you get a direct handle to GetGetMethod and GetSetMethod of the PropertyInfo, hence reflection is not used every time.
public static Func<S, T> BuildGetAccessor<S, T>(Expression<Func<S, T>> propertySelector)
{
return propertySelector.GetPropertyInfo().GetGetMethod().CreateDelegate<Func<S, T>>();
}
public static Action<S, T> BuildSetAccessor<S, T>(Expression<Func<S, T>> propertySelector)
{
return propertySelector.GetPropertyInfo().GetSetMethod().CreateDelegate<Action<S, T>>();
}
// a generic extension for CreateDelegate
public static T CreateDelegate<T>(this MethodInfo method) where T : class
{
return Delegate.CreateDelegate(typeof(T), method) as T;
}
public static PropertyInfo GetPropertyInfo<S, T>(this Expression<Func<S, T>> propertySelector)
{
var body = propertySelector.Body as MemberExpression;
if (body == null)
throw new MissingMemberException("something went wrong");
return body.Member as PropertyInfo;
}
So now you call:
TestClass cwp = new TestClass();
var access = BuildGetAccessor((TestClass t) => t.AnyValue);
var result = access(cwp);
Or even better you can encapsulate the logic in a dedicated class to have a get and set methods on it.
Something like:
public class Accessor<S>
{
public static Accessor<S, T> Create<T>(Expression<Func<S, T>> memberSelector)
{
return new GetterSetter<T>(memberSelector);
}
public Accessor<S, T> Get<T>(Expression<Func<S, T>> memberSelector)
{
return Create(memberSelector);
}
public Accessor()
{
}
class GetterSetter<T> : Accessor<S, T>
{
public GetterSetter(Expression<Func<S, T>> memberSelector) : base(memberSelector)
{
}
}
}
public class Accessor<S, T> : Accessor<S>
{
Func<S, T> Getter;
Action<S, T> Setter;
public bool IsReadable { get; private set; }
public bool IsWritable { get; private set; }
public T this[S instance]
{
get
{
if (!IsReadable)
throw new ArgumentException("Property get method not found.");
return Getter(instance);
}
set
{
if (!IsWritable)
throw new ArgumentException("Property set method not found.");
Setter(instance, value);
}
}
protected Accessor(Expression<Func<S, T>> memberSelector) //access not given to outside world
{
var prop = memberSelector.GetPropertyInfo();
IsReadable = prop.CanRead;
IsWritable = prop.CanWrite;
AssignDelegate(IsReadable, ref Getter, prop.GetGetMethod());
AssignDelegate(IsWritable, ref Setter, prop.GetSetMethod());
}
void AssignDelegate<K>(bool assignable, ref K assignee, MethodInfo assignor) where K : class
{
if (assignable)
assignee = assignor.CreateDelegate<K>();
}
}
Short and simple. You can carry around an instance of this class for every "class-property" pair you wish to get/set.
Usage:
Person p = new Person { Age = 23 };
var ageAccessor = Accessor<Person>(x => x.Age);
int age = ageAccessor[p]; //gets 23
ageAccessor[p] = 45; //sets 45
Bit bad use of indexers here, you may replace it with dedicated "Get" and "Set" methods, but very intuitive to me :)
To avoid having to specify type each time like,
var ageAccessor = Accessor<Person>(x => x.Age);
var nameAccessor = Accessor<Person>(x => x.Name);
var placeAccessor = Accessor<Person>(x => x.Place);
I made the base Accessor<> class instantiable, which means you can do
var personAccessor = new Accessor<Person>();
var ageAccessor = personAccessor.Get(x => x.Age);
var nameAccessor = personAccessor.Get(x => x.Name);
var placeAccessor = personAccessor.Get(x => x.Place);
Having a base Accessor<> class means you can treat them as one type, for eg,
var personAccessor = new Accessor<Person>();
var personAccessorArray = new Accessor<Person>[]
{
personAccessor.Get(x => x.Age),
personAccessor.Get(x => x.Name),
personAccessor.Get(x => x.Place);
};
You should look at FastMember (nuget, source code], it's really fast comparing to reflection.
I've tested these 3 implementations:
The benchmark needs a benchmark function:
static long Benchmark(Action action, int iterationCount, bool print = true)
{
GC.Collect();
var sw = new Stopwatch();
action(); // Execute once before
sw.Start();
for (var i = 0; i <= iterationCount; i++)
{
action();
}
sw.Stop();
if (print) System.Console.WriteLine("Elapsed: {0}ms", sw.ElapsedMilliseconds);
return sw.ElapsedMilliseconds;
}
A fake class:
public class ClassA
{
public string PropertyA { get; set; }
}
Some test methods:
private static void Set(string propertyName, string value)
{
var obj = new ClassA();
obj.PropertyA = value;
}
private static void FastMember(string propertyName, string value)
{
var obj = new ClassA();
var type = obj.GetType();
var accessors = TypeAccessor.Create(type);
accessors[obj, "PropertyA"] = "PropertyValue";
}
private static void SetValue(string propertyName, string value)
{
var obj = new ClassA();
var propertyInfo = obj.GetType().GetProperty(propertyName);
propertyInfo.SetValue(obj, value);
}
private static void SetMethodInvoke(string propertyName, string value)
{
var obj = new ClassA();
var propertyInfo = obj.GetType().GetProperty(propertyName);
propertyInfo.SetMethod.Invoke(obj, new object[] { value });
}
The script itself:
var iterationCount = 100000;
var propertyName = "PropertyA";
var value = "PropertyValue";
Benchmark(() => Set(propertyName, value), iterationCount);
Benchmark(() => FastMember(propertyName, value), iterationCount);
Benchmark(() => SetValue(propertyName, value), iterationCount);
Benchmark(() => SetMethodInvoke(propertyName, value), iterationCount);
Results for 100 000 iterations:
Default setter : 3ms
FastMember: 36ms
PropertyInfo.SetValue: 109ms
PropertyInfo.SetMethod: 91ms
Now you can choose yours !!!
Just be sure that you are caching the PropertyInfo somehow, so that you aren't repeatably calling type.GetProperty. Other than that it would probably be faster if you created a delegate to a method on the type that performed the increment, or like Teoman suggested make the type implement an interface and use that.
