Generics in C#.NET — For a generic class SortObjects that must compare any type (int, float, byte, etc.), which construct should be used to implement the comparison function cleanly and type-safely?

Introduction / Context:
Sorting arbitrary objects generically in C#.NET requires a type-safe way to compare two instances. The question asks which construct best provides a reusable comparison contract for any T.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The class SortObjects should sort values of many types.
• We want a design that works across the .NET type system.
• Solutions should be type-safe and extensible.

Concept / Approach:
Interfaces such as IComparable and IComparer define comparison contracts. A generic sorter can rely on IComparable implemented by T, or accept an IComparer instance. This enables strong typing, reusability, and consistent semantics. While delegates like Comparison can be used for one-off comparisons, the canonical, framework-wide approach is through interfaces.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Use built-in List.Sort which follows the same pattern with IComparer or Comparison overloads. This demonstrates the interface-based design is standard.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Namespace/Attribute: metadata/organization concepts, not behavioral contracts.
• Encapsulation: a principle, not a comparison API.
• Delegate: useful for ad-hoc comparisons, but the long-term, reusable contract for generic sorting is via interfaces.

Common Pitfalls:
Hard-coding comparisons for each type or using object and casting, which sacrifices type safety.

Final Answer:
Interface