UnitsNet VS ValueOf

If engineering/scientific projects appeal to you, Units of measurement implementations for Java are woefully behind when compared with the likes of UnitsNet for C#.

Check out EngineeringUnits (https://github.com/MadsKirkFoged/EngineeringUnits), or UnitsNet (https://github.com/angularsen/UnitsNet)

https://github.com/angularsen/UnitsNet is sort of an extreme example of this, and their https://github.com/angularsen/UnitsNet/blob/master/Common/UnitDefinitions/Length.json gives an example of how to allow multiple names for units.

Just FYI: https://github.com/angularsen/UnitsNet

(I occasionally use https://github.com/angularsen/UnitsNet/, but it's not quite the same as doing it at the compiler level.)

UnitsNet does this for common units of measure, and for a more general solution, there's also ValueOf

Have you looked into using UnitsNet instead of rolling your own physical quantity library? I've used it before and it's pretty nice.

What would be best is if there was a library to use to convert things to and from measurements. This was what I first attempted, using The UnitsNet library. This library is excellent, and I recommend it to many people. The issue I have with it, is that it was far more in depth than what I need it to do.

As we anticipate advancements in C#, we can still forge ahead with crafting resilient applications by utilizing the "ValueOf" package as a provisional solution. Below, we create a validated EmailAddress class leveraging the package:

Probably better to use something like https://github.com/mcintyre321/ValueOf until we get a better solution (if we ever do). I agree that this is a pitfall.

The problem you’re describing here I think is ‘primitive obsession’, and the solution you’ve described is I think essentially a value object. This library might be useful https://github.com/mcintyre321/ValueOf

It lacks compile-time validation (though an analyzer that at least detects validation errors in the constructor should be fairly easy; more complicated flow control cases are probably hard), but at runtime, https://github.com/mcintyre321/ValueOf would let you do that.

If you want to wrap a small number of properties in a type to avoid primitive obsession, consider using ValueOf.

You might be able to create a wrapper type with something like ValueOf.

I good library I've found for addressing this issue is https://github.com/mcintyre321/ValueOf