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?


  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..


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine:
threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration:

TeamCity.NET 4.51EF 6.0.2VS2013
It seems that there …

Entity Framework (EF) TransactionScope vs Database.BeginTransaction

In today blog post we will talk a little about a new feature that is available on EF6+ related to Transactions.
Until now, when we had to use transaction we used ‘TransactionScope’. It works great and I would say that is something that is now in our blood.
using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required)) { using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("...")) { conn.Open(); SqlCommand sqlCommand = new SqlCommand(); sqlCommand.Connection = conn; sqlCommand.CommandText = ... sqlCommand.ExecuteNonQuery(); ... } scope.Complete(); } Starting with EF6.0 we have a new way to work with transactions. The new approach is based on Database.BeginTransaction(), Database.Rollback(), Database.Commit(). Yes, no more TransactionScope.
In the followi…

GET call of REST API that contains '/'-slash character in the value of a parameter

Let’s assume that we have the following scenario: I have a public HTTP endpoint and I need to post some content using GET command. One of the parameters contains special characters like “\” and “/”. If the endpoint is an ApiController than you may have problems if you encode the parameter using the http encoder.
using (var httpClient = new HttpClient()) { httpClient.BaseAddress = baseUrl; Task<HttpResponseMessage> response = httpClient.GetAsync(string.Format("api/foo/{0}", "qwert/qwerqwer"))); response.Wait(); response.Result.EnsureSuccessStatusCode(); } One possible solution would be to encode the query parameter using UrlTokenEncode method of HttpServerUtility class and GetBytes method ofUTF8. In this way you would get the array of bytes of the parameter and encode them as a url token.
The following code show to you how you could write the encode and decode methods.