Skip to main content

Fields vs properties

De unde a pornit totul:
De la o discutie in care se spunea ca la inceput este mai bine sa folosim field-uri si nu proprietatiile, iar in cazul in care ajungem sa avem nevoie de ele, le putem înlocuii in orice moment cu propietati.

Aici apare o problema. Din punct de vedere a framework-ului field-urile si proprietatiile sunt total diferite (sunt binar incompatibile). Din aceasta cauza o sa fim nevoiti sa recompilam toate assembly-urile care folosesc obiectul nostru.
In cazul in care folosim reflection la accesarea field-urilor trebuie modificat, deoarece modul in care proprietatiilese acceseaza este diferit.
Singurul avantaj care apare la field-uri este performanta, care poate sa fie îmbunătățita foarte mult. Totodata field-urile pot sa fie folosite ca si parametri ref sau out.
Cand se folosesc propietati se poate controla modul in care valoarea se seteaza (validare) sau se obtine (get,set). In cazul in care modifiarea unei proprietati produce modificarea altor valori, acest lucru poate sa fie foarte usor de facut cu o proprietate.
Problema s-ar pune intre proprietăți automate si field-uri publice. Din punct de vedere a implementarii, este mult mai usor sa schimbam implementarea la o proprietate daca vrem sa facem ceva mai special, fara sa fim nevoiti sa recompilam toata solutia. De exemplu sa avem private setter.
Cea ce nu putem face cu proprietati, este sa le setam o valurea de default in mod automat. Acest lucru trebuie facut in constructor sau intr-o metoda de initializare.
  • Ca si concluzie o sa enumar avantajele pe care le avem daca folosim proprietati publice si nu field-uri publice:
  • lazy loading;
  • propietatiile pot sa arunce erori;
  • daca lucram cu data binding trebuie sa folosim propietati;
  • se poate adauga validare cand o valoare se seteaza;
  • fine-grained control (logging intr-un fisier de exemplu, validare);
  • pot sa fie virtual si se poate face overwritten;
  • pot sa apara in interfata;
Ce parere aveti? Exista un motiv pentru care am putea sa avem field-uri publice?

Comments

  1. Sunt putine cazuri in care e suficient un field public: de ex. clase care sigur vor fi folosite doar ca DTO-uri "dummy"..
    Altfel, overheadul unui property autoimplemented e neglijabil..

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Windows Docker Containers can make WIN32 API calls, use COM and ASP.NET WebForms

After the last post , I received two interesting questions related to Docker and Windows. People were interested if we do Win32 API calls from a Docker container and if there is support for COM. WIN32 Support To test calls to WIN32 API, let’s try to populate SYSTEM_INFO class. [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public struct SYSTEM_INFO { public uint dwOemId; public uint dwPageSize; public uint lpMinimumApplicationAddress; public uint lpMaximumApplicationAddress; public uint dwActiveProcessorMask; public uint dwNumberOfProcessors; public uint dwProcessorType; public uint dwAllocationGranularity; public uint dwProcessorLevel; public uint dwProcessorRevision; } ... [DllImport("kernel32")] static extern void GetSystemInfo(ref SYSTEM_INFO pSI); ... SYSTEM_INFO pSI = new SYSTEM_INFO(...

How to audit an Azure Cosmos DB

In this post, we will talk about how we can audit an Azure Cosmos DB database. Before jumping into the problem let us define the business requirement: As an Administrator I want to be able to audit all changes that were done to specific collection inside my Azure Cosmos DB. The requirement is simple, but can be a little tricky to implement fully. First of all when you are using Azure Cosmos DB or any other storage solution there are 99% odds that you’ll have more than one system that writes data to it. This means that you have or not have control on the systems that are doing any create/update/delete operations. Solution 1: Diagnostic Logs Cosmos DB allows us activate diagnostics logs and stream the output a storage account for achieving to other systems like Event Hub or Log Analytics. This would allow us to have information related to who, when, what, response code and how the access operation to our Cosmos DB was done. Beside this there is a field that specifies what was th...

Cloud Myths: Cloud is Cheaper (Pill 1 of 5 / Cloud Pills)

Cloud Myths: Cloud is Cheaper (Pill 1 of 5 / Cloud Pills) The idea that moving to the cloud reduces the costs is a common misconception. The cloud infrastructure provides flexibility, scalability, and better CAPEX, but it does not guarantee lower costs without proper optimisation and management of the cloud services and infrastructure. Idle and unused resources, overprovisioning, oversize databases, and unnecessary data transfer can increase running costs. The regional pricing mode, multi-cloud complexity, and cost variety add extra complexity to the cost function. Cloud adoption without a cost governance strategy can result in unexpected expenses. Improper usage, combined with a pay-as-you-go model, can result in a nightmare for business stakeholders who cannot track and manage the monthly costs. Cloud-native services such as AI services, managed databases, and analytics platforms are powerful, provide out-of-the-shelve capabilities, and increase business agility and innovation. H...