Change Record to be an interface

[sa2aie]

Change the class Record to be an interface instead of a class. This will be a more versatile solution.
This may be a breaking change due to a name change (Record->IRecord) to follow naming conventions.

[Odonno]

Indeed, having a base class and not an interface have many limitations. Migrating to an IRecord interface seems feasible. I was thinking about this implementation:

public interface IRecord<T>
{
  public T? Id { get; set; }
}

public interface IThingRecord : IRecord<Thing> { }

public interface ITableAndIdRecord<TTable, TId> : IRecord<TId>
{
  public TTable Table { get; set; }
}

IThingRecord and ITableAndIdRecord as the 2 main base types to detect what to do: either use the Thing object directly or create a thing from both Table and Id property.

This will allow to create default interfaces and extend with new ones. Example:

public interface IStringTableAndRecord<TId> : ITableAndIdRecord<string, TId> {}

public interface IStringTableAndStringIdRecord : IStringTableAndRecord<string> {}

I may have oversee things but that could fit your needs.

[uherman]

@Odonno This would be really great!

@sa2aie The breaking change could be avoided by inheriting the interface in the base class i belive.

[Obsolete("Use IRecord interface instead")]
public abstract class Record : IRecord<Thing>
{
    public Thing Id { get; set; }
}