Is it possible to have a method which derived classes cannot call, but consumers of a class can call?

Question

I'm implementing the template method pattern. There are a couple of settings that clients can change on this template method; but I would like to prevent implementers of the template method from changing these settings, because in such cases they might be able to break invariants of the template method (base) class. I'd like such things to fail to compile if possible. (Otherwise tis time to refactor to strategy :) )

Example:

abstract class TemplateMethod
{
    // Clients of implementers of this template method change these settings before
    // calling GetItems()
    public SomeType RootItem { get; set; }
    public bool Recursive { get; set; }
    protected abstract bool ItemIsWhitelisted(SomeType item);
    public IEnumerable<SomeType> GetItems()
    {
        var stack = new Stack<T>();
        stack.Push(RootItem);
        while (!stack.empty())
        {
            var current = stack.Pop();
            if (Recursive)
            {
                foreach (var item in current.Children)
                    stack.Push(item);
            }

            if (!ItemIsWhitelisted(current))
                yield return current;
        }
    }
}

class Implementer : TemplateMethod
{
    protected override bool ItemIsWhitelisted(SomeType item)
    {
        Recursive = false; // Oops; TemplateMethod.GetItems didn't expect this
                           // to change inside ItemIsWhitelisted
        return item.CanFrobinate();
    }
}

One method is to refactor to strategy, producing the following:

interface IImplementer
{
    bool ItemIswhitelisted(SomeType item);
}

sealed class NoLongerATemplateMethod
{
    // Clients of implementers of this template method change these settings before
    // calling GetItems()
    public SomeType RootItem { get; set; }
    public bool Recursive { get; set; }
    public IImplementer impl { get; set; } // would be private set in real code
    public IEnumerable<SomeType> GetItems()
    {
        var stack = new Stack<T>();
        stack.Push(RootItem);
        while (!stack.empty())
        {
            var current = stack.Pop();
            if (Recursive)
            {
                foreach (var item in current.Children)
                    stack.Push(item);
            }

            if (!impl.ItemIsWhitelisted(current))
                yield return current;
        }
    }
}

class Implementer : IImplementer
{
    public bool ItemIsWhitelisted(SomeType item)
    {
        Recursive = false; // No longer compiles
        return item.CanFrobinate();
    }
}

I'm curious if there's a language feature which indicates this constraint without applying refactor to strategy.

Answer 1

You should make TemplateMethod's settings immutable:

abstract class TemplateMethod
{
    protected TemplateMethod(bool recursive)
    {
        Recursive = recursive;
    }

    public bool Recursive { get; private set; }
    protected abstract bool ItemIsWhitelisted(SomeType item);
    public IEnumerable<SomeType> GetItems() { /* ... */ }
}

class Implementer : TemplateMethod
{
    protected override bool ItemIsWhitelisted(SomeType item)
    {
        Recursive = false; // Oops; Recursive is read-only
        return item.CanFrobinate();
    }
}

UPD.

Option #2. If it is hard to pass settings via ctor, you may consider injection of immutable parameter object. Something like this (MEF-styled sample):

public interface ISettings
{
    bool Recursive { get; }
}

abstract class TemplateMethod
{
    [Import]
    public ISettings Settings { get; private set; }
    protected abstract bool ItemIsWhitelisted(SomeType item);
    public IEnumerable<SomeType> GetItems() { /* ... */ }
}

Of course, this means, that TemplateMethod can't change settings too.

Option #3. Explicit interface implementation (if TemplateMethod should be able to change settings):

public interface ISettingsWriter
{
    bool Recursive { set; }
}

abstract class TemplateMethod : ISettingsWriter
{
    public bool Recursive { get; private set; }

    bool ISettingsWriter.Recursive
    {
        set { Recursive = value; }
    }

    protected abstract bool ItemIsWhitelisted(SomeType item);
}

class Implementer : TemplateMethod
{
    protected override bool ItemIsWhitelisted(SomeType item)
    {
        Recursive = true; // Oops; Recursive is still read-only;

        return true;
    }
}

And of course, this means, that everyone, who wants to change TemplateMethod.Recursive, have to cast TemplateMethod to ISettingsWriter.

Answer 2

I don't think you can reasonably represent such "callable by everyone, but not my child" restriction (child is one of everyone, and as can't be blocked without blocking everyone too...).

Not having such properties altogether is another approach (compared to making preoperties R/O in some way as suggested by @Dennis)

public IEnumerable<SomeType> GetItems(bool Recursive)...

or even

public IEnumerable<SomeType> GetItems(IterationSettings settings = DefaultSettings)

Note that such approach (similar to full strategy pattern for iteration) also solves the issue when external "trusted" (not child) caller changes properties in the middle of iteration (i.e. if there are some sort of callbacks/events fired by "child" implementation).

Answer 3

If your "Framework" isn't published with source code, and the implementers are using a dll, you just can do this:

public abstract class TemplateMethod
{
    internal void DoSomething() { ... }
}

public abstract class Consumer
{
    TemplateMethod _Template = ...;
    protected void DoSomething()
    {
        _Template.DoSomething();
    }
}

Answer 4

You could try using stack trace to understand whether calling method may change the value or not.

    private bool _recursive;
    public bool Recursive {
        get
        {
            return _recursive;
        }
        set
        {
            StackTrace stackTrace = new StackTrace();
            if (stackTrace.GetFrame(1).GetMethod().Name == "ItemIsWhitelisted")
            {
                throw new Exception("Please don't");
            }
            _recursive = value;
        }
    }

or you could check DeclaringType of method in stack trace

stackTrace.GetFrame(1).GetMethod().DeclaringType