using generic method instead of method parameter

I am using a framework that has this method

public static void Initialize<T>() where T : Game;

and in sample code you intialize your game like this

TargetDevice.Initialize<MyGame>();

I am wondering what are benefits of using style of initialization

public static void Initialize<T>() where T : Game;
TargetDevice.Initialize<MyGame>();

instead of

public static void Initialize(Game game);
TargetDevice.Initialize(new MyGame());

Is that generic style of initializing method has any name that I can read of? Why should I choose one style inste开发者_如何学Pythonad of another?

Thanks.

---

If you mean the difference between:

Foo<T>()

and

Foo(Type type)

then there are merits of both. The latter is much more convenient when using reflecting to load the types (maybe your Game types come from plugins?) - generics and reflection don't mix very conveniently.

The generic version is handy when everything is known at compile-time; you can add additional validation via constraints etc, which are enforced by the compiler. It can also be handy if you specifically want to use the T, for example to use generic comparisons via Comparer<T>.Default or EqualityComparer<T>.Default (emphasis: these are just examples) - which accesses many common patterns, while avoiding things like boxing where appropriate.

In your case, since the T : Game, boxing isn't an issue (I'm assuming Game is a class, not an interface). You could go either way; a List<Game> will work almost as well as the slightly more specific List<T> (where T : Game), so it is unlikely to cause problems.

If reflection is involved at all, I'd use the second form, perhaps offering both:

void Foo<T>() where T : Game
{
    Foo(typeof(T));
}
void Foo(Type type) {...}

Most generic features can be emulated - for example Activator.CreateInstance(type) in place of new T() - or a cast to a known interface in place of T : ISomeInterface. You don't get the use of the "constrained" opcode, but in your case that doesn't apply anyway.