• Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+d gmail.com> Jul 31 2009
• =?UTF-8?B?IkrDqXLDtG1lIE0uIEJlcmdlciI=?= <jeberger free.fr> Jul 31 2009

Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+d gmail.com> writes:

Nick Sabalausky Wrote:

 "Jesse Phillips" <jessekphillips+d gmail.com> wrote in message 
 news:h4vg5q$13mn$1 digitalmars.com...
 I find writing

 property int foo { get; set;}

 More work than

 public int foo;


 That's an unfair apples-to-oranges comparison.
 
 This:
 
 property int foo { get; set;}
 
 Is comparable to this current code:
 
 private int _foo;
 int foo()
 {
     return _foo;
 }
 int foo(int value)
 {
     _foo = value;
     return value;
 }
 
 It is *not* comparable to:
 
 public int foo;


I thought this might come up, but what do you gain from all that extra code? I
heard mention of not being able to get the address of the field... but that is
a very deliberate thing to do and should not be the purpose of getters/setters.

=?UTF-8?B?IkrDqXLDtG1lIE0uIEJlcmdlciI=?= <jeberger free.fr> writes:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Jesse Phillips wrote:
 Nick Sabalausky Wrote:
=20
 "Jesse Phillips" <jessekphillips+d gmail.com> wrote in message=20
 news:h4vg5q$13mn$1 digitalmars.com...
 I find writing

 property int foo { get; set;}

 More work than

 public int foo;



 This:

 property int foo { get; set;}

 Is comparable to this current code:

 private int _foo;
 int foo()
 {
     return _foo;
 }
 int foo(int value)
 {
     _foo =3D value;
     return value;
 }

 It is *not* comparable to:

 public int foo;


 I thought this might come up, but what do you gain from all that extra =


=2E but that is a very deliberate thing to do and should not be the purpo=
se of getters/setters.

	Nothing. If you're property is destined to be read from and written=20
to and all it does is access the underlying field, then you might as=20
well use a public field anyway. A "special" property syntax becomes=20
necessary when you want to do one of the following:

  - Read only access (note that this can't be done with "const" if=20
you want the object to be able to modify its own properties but want=20
to prevent outside code from doing it);

  - Write only access;

  - Take extra action on access (i.e mark object "dirty" or notify=20
registered listeners when a property is changed);

  - "Virtual" properties, i.e properties that don't correspond to=20
any memory storage (or where the storage is merely a cache for a=20
value that's expensive to compute).

		Jerome
--=20
mailto:jeberger free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger jabber.fr