How can I use AddSubType on a type that is a collection?

RuntimeTypeModel.Default[typeof(IMyClass2)].AddSubType(1, typeof(MyClass)) threw "Repeated data (a list, collection, etc) has inbuilt behaviour and cannot be subclassed" exception. Following is the code snippet

public partial class TestClass
{
    public TestClass()
    {         
    }

    private void Serialize(object sender, EventArgs e)
    {
        Stream stream = new FileStream(resultFilePath,
            FileMode.OpenOrCreate, FileAccess.ReadWrite, FileShare.None);

        RuntimeTypeModel.Default[typeof(IMyClass2)].AddSubType(1, typeof(MyClass));
        Serializer.Serialize(stream, myDict);
        stream.Close();
    }

 开发者_如何学Python   private void DeSerialize(object sender, EventArgs e)
    {
        Stream stream = new
            FileStream(resultFilePath, FileMode.OpenOrCreate, FileAccess.ReadWrite, FileShare.None);

        Dictionary<int, IMyClass2> myNewDict = Serializer.Deserialize<Dictionary<int, IMyClass2>>(stream);
        stream.Close();
    }
}

[ProtoContract]
[Serializable]
public class MyClass : IMyClass2
{
    #region IMyClass2 Members

    //members

    #endregion

    #region IEnumerable Members

    public IEnumerator GetEnumerator()
    {
        throw new NotImplementedException();
    }

    #endregion
}

public interface IMyClass2 : IMyClass1
{
    //members
}

public interface IMyClass1 : IEnumerable
{
    //members
}

How should I handle this exception? Please help.

---

protobuf-net has concluded (quite reasonably) that your base-type there is a collection-type. Collections (in common with most other serializers and data-binding etc) get treated differently to individual items. In "protocol buffers" this is even more pronounced, since the container doesn't even exist in the stream - all that is serialized is the individual elements. To illustrate this in xml terms (clarification: protobuf-net is nothing to do with xml, but this helps visualise), then in xml there are 2 approaches for sub-items:

<foo>                 <foo>
   <items>              <bar/>
      <bar/>            <bar/>
      <bar/>            <bar/>
      <bar/>          </foo>
   </items>
</foo>

of those, protobuf-net would be more like the example on the right - there is no representation at all of the container (items).

Because of this (which is related to the Google specification, not protobuf-net's implementation), it cannot store anything particular to the collection, so it does not have anywhere to note any particulars like inheritance (which also doesn't exist in the Google specification, but I can work around it for individual items).

In short, I would suggest "don't do that". Perhaps if I understood the scenario a bit more completely I could give a more useful answer.

Note (as hinted above) that it can handle inheritance of individual items, so a List<SomeBaseType> can contain DerivedType1, DerivedType2 and YetAnotherDerivedType instances.