In my application I have a custom attribute calles ResourceTargetAttribute which looks like:
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property)]
private class ResourceTargetAttribute : Attribute
{
public ResourceTargetAttribute(string resourceKey)
{
ResourceKey = resourceKey;
}
public string ResourceKey { get; private set; }
}
The usage looks like:
[ResourceTarget("FileNotFoundErrorText")
public string FileNotFoundErrorText { get; private set; }
The constructor of the class where the FileNotFoundErrorText-Property is defined resolves this attribute. This just works fine.
Now I was thinking about to extend the attribute to have a parameterless constructor and if this is called the name of the Property the attribute is on will automatically be used for the ResourceKey.
Therefore I've introduced a new constructor which just looks like:
public ResourceTargetAttribute()
{
}
And the usage then should look like:
[ResourceTarget()]
public string FileNotFoundErrorText { get; private set; }
And here I want to have name of the FileNotFoundErrorText-Property automatically be passed to the ResourceTarget-Attribute.
Is there a possibility to do this?
The CallerMemberNameAttribute might help you:
public ResourceTargetAttribute([CallerMemberName] string propertyName = null)
{
ResourceKey = propertyName;
}
Usage:
[ResourceTarget]
public string FileNotFoundErrorText { get; private set; }
If you get the attribute, the
attr.ResourceKey
property should contain FileNotFoundErrorText as value.
Otherwise I just would go the way passing the name as string as attributes are metadata applied to the members of a type, the type itself, method parameters or the assembly so you must have the original member itself to access its meta data.
The easiest way would be to utilize nameof-operator:
[ResourceTarget(nameof(FileNotFoundErrorText)]
public string FileNotFoundErrorText { get; private set; }
Another approach would be to modify the code that actual examines / searches for these marker-attributes. use reflection to get the actual Property-Name on which the attribute was applied.
Maybe if you provide the mentioned "constructor-code" I could further assist.
I have a parse subclass like:
[ParseClassName("_User")]
public class RFUser : ParseUser
{
[ParseFieldName("firstname")]
public string Firstname
{
get { return GetProperty<string>(); }
set { SetProperty(value); }
}
}
Is it possible to read the ParseFieldName ("firstname") from other parts of the program?
Something like:
typeof(RFUser).ParseFieldNames.Firstname ?
You are close. The ParseClassName and ParseFieldName attributes appear to be custom attributes. If so, you can access them if you get the name of the property that is set by the attribute's constructor.
Because I do not have (or don't know I have) the DLL that defines the ParseFieldName attribute's class, I created it as follows:
public class ParseFieldName: Attribute
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public ParseFieldName(string name)
{
this.Name = name;
}
}
For reference, my RFUser class is defined as:
[ParseClassName("_User")]
public class RFUser
{
[ParseFieldName("fieldfirstname")]
public string Firstname { get; set; }
}
Elsewhere in the program, I have a class with a using System.Reflection statement and that has a method containing the following code snippet:
RFUser user = new RFUser();
var attribute = (ParseFieldName)user.GetType().GetProperty("Firstname").GetCustomAttribute(typeof(ParseFieldName));
Console.WriteLine(attribute.Name);
The value displayed in the console is fieldfirstname.
You can also access regular attributes if you substitute Attributes for GetCustomAttributes().
I am working an ASP.net MVC4 website and have model & view model layer. Because of certain reasons I have different names for few properties in Model and ViewModel
Model
public partial class Project
{
public string Desc {get; set;}
}
View Model
public class ProjectViewModel
{
public string Description { get; set; }
}
Now at model layer, I need to use ViewModel name of a property if it is different. I was thinking of creating a custom attribute so that I can have something like this in models:
public partial class Project
{
[ViewModelPropertyName("Description")]
public string Desc {get;set;}
}
and use it at model layer as
string.Format("ViewModel Property Name is {0}", this.Desc.ViewModelPropertyName())
I want this to generic so that if there is no ViewModelPropertyName attribute on a property then it should return the same property name i.e. if Desc property has no attribute then it should return "Desc" only.
Here is what I tried
public class ViewModelPropertyNameAttribute : System.Attribute
{
#region Fields
string viewModelPropertyName;
#endregion
#region Properties
public string GetViewModelPropertyName()
{
return viewModelPropertyName;
}
#endregion
#region Constructor
public ViewModelPropertyNameAttribute(string propertyName)
{
this.viewModelPropertyName = propertyName;
}
#endregion
}
Need help for how to access custom attribute
Current state
public static class ModelExtensionMethods
{
public static string ViewModelPropertyName(this Object obj)
{
// ERROR: Cannot convert from 'object' to 'System.Reflect.Assembly'
System.Attribute[] attrs = System.Attribute.GetCustomAttributes(obj);
foreach (System.Attribute attr in attrs)
{
if (attr is ViewModelPropertyNameAttribute)
{
return ((ViewModelPropertyNameAttribute)attr).GetViewModelPropertyName();
}
}
return string.Empty;
}
}
But this has compile time error:
Unfortunately you can not get the attributes you used to decorate the properties by reflecting on the type of the property itself. I have therefore modified your ViewModelPropertyName(this object) Extension method slightly to take in the name of your desired property.
This method will now take in the name of the property whose attribute you wish to get. If the attribute exists it will return the value passed to its constructor, if it on the other hand, does not exist it will simply return the name of the property you passed in.
public static class ModelExtensionMethods
{
public static string ViewModelPropertyName(this object obj, string name)
{
var attributes = obj.GetType()
.GetCustomAttributes(true)
.OfType<MetadataTypeAttribute>()
.First()
.MetadataClassType
.GetProperty(name)
.GetCustomAttributes(true);
if (attributes.OfType<ViewModelPropertyNameAttribute>().Any())
{
return attributes.OfType<ViewModelPropertyNameAttribute>()
.First()
.GetViewModelPropertyName();
}
else
{
return name;
}
}
}
You can also define the following classes to test this new approach.
[MetadataType(typeof(TestClassMeta))]
class TestClass { }
class TestClassMeta
{
[ViewModelPropertyName("TheName")]
public string FirstName { get; set; }
public string LastName { get; set; }
}
Also, as you can see from the following lines of code, your ViewModelPropertyName(this object, string) Extension method will now be called on the instance of your TestClass, instead of calling it on the property itself.
class Program
{
static void Main()
{
Console.WriteLine(new TestClass().ViewModelPropertyName("FirstName"));
Console.WriteLine(new TestClass().ViewModelPropertyName("LastName"));
Console.Read();
}
}
This question already has answers here:
Public Fields versus Automatic Properties
(14 answers)
Closed 10 years ago.
I am creating a simple User class, does it matter if I use public properties with private fields verses just using public fields?
Here is an example of what I mean:
public class clsUser
{
private string name;
private string lName;
public string Name
{
get
{
return name;
}
set
{
name= value;
}
}
public string LName
{
get
{
return lName;
}
set
{
lName= value;
}
}
public clsUser(string userID)
{
//get the user id here and set the properties
this.name= getName(userID);
this.lName= getLName(userID);
}
}
or can I just make
public string name;
public string lName;
public and now worry about typing out all of these:
public string Name
{
get
{
return name;
}
set
{
name= value;
}
}
I am then going to populate a form using these on another page like so:
clsUser cUser - new clsUser("myid");
txtSomething.Text = cUser.name;
and so on...
I guess my question is why do I need to retype the properties first as private and then as public (as I've seen in all web examples). Why not just make them public to begin with?
You're confusing fields with properties.
String name; is a field.
Unlike a property, you have no control over it.
If you eventually decide to add validation or change events or other logic, you'll need to change it to a property, which will break compiled code.
Certain features (eg, bindings) also can only work with properties.
Instead, you can use auto-implemented properties to make the compiler generate all of that boilerplate:
public String Name { get; set; }
How do you give a C# auto-property an initial value?
I either use the constructor, or revert to the old syntax.
Using the Constructor:
class Person
{
public Person()
{
Name = "Initial Name";
}
public string Name { get; set; }
}
Using normal property syntax (with an initial value)
private string name = "Initial Name";
public string Name
{
get
{
return name;
}
set
{
name = value;
}
}
Is there a better way?
In C# 5 and earlier, to give auto implemented properties an initial value, you have to do it in a constructor.
Since C# 6.0, you can specify initial value in-line. The syntax is:
public int X { get; set; } = x; // C# 6 or higher
DefaultValueAttribute is intended to be used by the VS designer (or any other consumer) to specify a default value, not an initial value. (Even if in designed object, initial value is the default value).
At compile time DefaultValueAttribute will not impact the generated IL and it will not be read to initialize the property to that value (see DefaultValue attribute is not working with my Auto Property).
Example of attributes that impact the IL are ThreadStaticAttribute, CallerMemberNameAttribute, ...
Edited on 1/2/15
C# 6 :
With C# 6 you can initialize auto-properties directly (finally!), there are now other answers that describe that.
C# 5 and below:
Though the intended use of the attribute is not to actually set the values of the properties, you can use reflection to always set them anyway...
public class DefaultValuesTest
{
public DefaultValuesTest()
{
foreach (PropertyDescriptor property in TypeDescriptor.GetProperties(this))
{
DefaultValueAttribute myAttribute = (DefaultValueAttribute)property.Attributes[typeof(DefaultValueAttribute)];
if (myAttribute != null)
{
property.SetValue(this, myAttribute.Value);
}
}
}
public void DoTest()
{
var db = DefaultValueBool;
var ds = DefaultValueString;
var di = DefaultValueInt;
}
[System.ComponentModel.DefaultValue(true)]
public bool DefaultValueBool { get; set; }
[System.ComponentModel.DefaultValue("Good")]
public string DefaultValueString { get; set; }
[System.ComponentModel.DefaultValue(27)]
public int DefaultValueInt { get; set; }
}
When you inline an initial value for a variable it will be done implicitly in the constructor anyway.
I would argue that this syntax was best practice in C# up to 5:
class Person
{
public Person()
{
//do anything before variable assignment
//assign initial values
Name = "Default Name";
//do anything after variable assignment
}
public string Name { get; set; }
}
As this gives you clear control of the order values are assigned.
As of C#6 there is a new way:
public string Name { get; set; } = "Default Name";
Sometimes I use this, if I don't want it to be actually set and persisted in my db:
class Person
{
private string _name;
public string Name
{
get
{
return string.IsNullOrEmpty(_name) ? "Default Name" : _name;
}
set { _name = value; }
}
}
Obviously if it's not a string then I might make the object nullable ( double?, int? ) and check if it's null, return a default, or return the value it's set to.
Then I can make a check in my repository to see if it's my default and not persist, or make a backdoor check in to see the true status of the backing value, before saving.
In C# 6.0 this is a breeze!
You can do it in the Class declaration itself, in the property declaration statements.
public class Coordinate
{
public int X { get; set; } = 34; // get or set auto-property with initializer
public int Y { get; } = 89; // read-only auto-property with initializer
public int Z { get; } // read-only auto-property with no initializer
// so it has to be initialized from constructor
public Coordinate() // .ctor()
{
Z = 42;
}
}
Starting with C# 6.0, We can assign default value to auto-implemented properties.
public string Name { get; set; } = "Some Name";
We can also create read-only auto implemented property like:
public string Name { get; } = "Some Name";
See: C# 6: First reactions , Initializers for automatically implemented properties - By Jon Skeet
In Version of C# (6.0) & greater, you can do :
For Readonly properties
public int ReadOnlyProp => 2;
For both Writable & Readable properties
public string PropTest { get; set; } = "test";
In current Version of C# (7.0), you can do : (The snippet rather displays how you can use expression bodied get/set accessors to make is more compact when using with backing fields)
private string label = "Default Value";
// Expression-bodied get / set accessors.
public string Label
{
get => label;
set => this.label = value;
}
In C# 9.0 was added support of init keyword - very useful and extremly sophisticated way for declaration read-only auto-properties:
Declare:
class Person
{
public string Name { get; init; } = "Anonymous user";
}
~Enjoy~ Use:
// 1. Person with default name
var anonymous = new Person();
Console.WriteLine($"Hello, {anonymous.Name}!");
// > Hello, Anonymous user!
// 2. Person with assigned value
var me = new Person { Name = "#codez0mb1e"};
Console.WriteLine($"Hello, {me.Name}!");
// > Hello, #codez0mb1e!
// 3. Attempt to re-assignment Name
me.Name = "My fake";
// > Compilation error: Init-only property can only be assigned in an object initializer
In addition to the answer already accepted, for the scenario when you want to define a default property as a function of other properties you can use expression body notation on C#6.0 (and higher) for even more elegant and concise constructs like:
public class Person{
public string FullName => $"{First} {Last}"; // expression body notation
public string First { get; set; } = "First";
public string Last { get; set; } = "Last";
}
You can use the above in the following fashion
var p = new Person();
p.FullName; // First Last
p.First = "Jon";
p.Last = "Snow";
p.FullName; // Jon Snow
In order to be able to use the above "=>" notation, the property must be read only, and you do not use the get accessor keyword.
Details on MSDN
In C# 6 and above you can simply use the syntax:
public object Foo { get; set; } = bar;
Note that to have a readonly property simply omit the set, as so:
public object Foo { get; } = bar;
You can also assign readonly auto-properties from the constructor.
Prior to this I responded as below.
I'd avoid adding a default to the constructor; leave that for dynamic assignments and avoid having two points at which the variable is assigned (i.e. the type default and in the constructor). Typically I'd simply write a normal property in such cases.
One other option is to do what ASP.Net does and define defaults via an attribute:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.defaultvalueattribute.aspx
My solution is to use a custom attribute that provides default value property initialization by constant or using property type initializer.
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)]
public class InstanceAttribute : Attribute
{
public bool IsConstructorCall { get; private set; }
public object[] Values { get; private set; }
public InstanceAttribute() : this(true) { }
public InstanceAttribute(object value) : this(false, value) { }
public InstanceAttribute(bool isConstructorCall, params object[] values)
{
IsConstructorCall = isConstructorCall;
Values = values ?? new object[0];
}
}
To use this attribute it's necessary to inherit a class from special base class-initializer or use a static helper method:
public abstract class DefaultValueInitializer
{
protected DefaultValueInitializer()
{
InitializeDefaultValues(this);
}
public static void InitializeDefaultValues(object obj)
{
var props = from prop in obj.GetType().GetProperties()
let attrs = prop.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(InstanceAttribute), false)
where attrs.Any()
select new { Property = prop, Attr = ((InstanceAttribute)attrs.First()) };
foreach (var pair in props)
{
object value = !pair.Attr.IsConstructorCall && pair.Attr.Values.Length > 0
? pair.Attr.Values[0]
: Activator.CreateInstance(pair.Property.PropertyType, pair.Attr.Values);
pair.Property.SetValue(obj, value, null);
}
}
}
Usage example:
public class Simple : DefaultValueInitializer
{
[Instance("StringValue")]
public string StringValue { get; set; }
[Instance]
public List<string> Items { get; set; }
[Instance(true, 3,4)]
public Point Point { get; set; }
}
public static void Main(string[] args)
{
var obj = new Simple
{
Items = {"Item1"}
};
Console.WriteLine(obj.Items[0]);
Console.WriteLine(obj.Point);
Console.WriteLine(obj.StringValue);
}
Output:
Item1
(X=3,Y=4)
StringValue
little complete sample:
using System.ComponentModel;
private bool bShowGroup ;
[Description("Show the group table"), Category("Sea"),DefaultValue(true)]
public bool ShowGroup
{
get { return bShowGroup; }
set { bShowGroup = value; }
}
You can simple put like this
public sealed class Employee
{
public int Id { get; set; } = 101;
}
In the constructor. The constructor's purpose is to initialized it's data members.
private string name;
public string Name
{
get
{
if(name == null)
{
name = "Default Name";
}
return name;
}
set
{
name = value;
}
}
Have you tried using the DefaultValueAttribute or ShouldSerialize and Reset methods in conjunction with the constructor? I feel like one of these two methods is necessary if you're making a class that might show up on the designer surface or in a property grid.
Use the constructor because "When the constructor is finished, Construction should be finished". properties are like states your classes hold, if you had to initialize a default state, you would do that in your constructor.
To clarify, yes, you need to set default values in the constructor for class derived objects. You will need to ensure the constructor exists with the proper access modifier for construction where used. If the object is not instantiated, e.g. it has no constructor (e.g. static methods) then the default value can be set by the field. The reasoning here is that the object itself will be created only once and you do not instantiate it.
#Darren Kopp - good answer, clean, and correct. And to reiterate, you CAN write constructors for Abstract methods. You just need to access them from the base class when writing the constructor:
Constructor at Base Class:
public BaseClassAbstract()
{
this.PropertyName = "Default Name";
}
Constructor at Derived / Concrete / Sub-Class:
public SubClass() : base() { }
The point here is that the instance variable drawn from the base class may bury your base field name. Setting the current instantiated object value using "this." will allow you to correctly form your object with respect to the current instance and required permission levels (access modifiers) where you are instantiating it.
public Class ClassName{
public int PropName{get;set;}
public ClassName{
PropName=0; //Default Value
}
}
This is old now, and my position has changed. I'm leaving the original answer for posterity only.
Personally, I don't see the point of making it a property at all if you're not going to do anything at all beyond the auto-property. Just leave it as a field. The encapsulation benefit for these item are just red herrings, because there's nothing behind them to encapsulate. If you ever need to change the underlying implementation you're still free to refactor them as properties without breaking any dependent code.
Hmm... maybe this will be the subject of it's own question later
class Person
{
/// Gets/sets a value indicating whether auto
/// save of review layer is enabled or not
[System.ComponentModel.DefaultValue(true)]
public bool AutoSaveReviewLayer { get; set; }
}
I know this is an old question, but it came up when I was looking for how to have a default value that gets inherited with the option to override, I came up with
//base class
public class Car
{
public virtual string FuelUnits
{
get { return "gasoline in gallons"; }
protected set { }
}
}
//derived
public class Tesla : Car
{
public override string FuelUnits => "ampere hour";
}
I think this would do it for ya givng SomeFlag a default of false.
private bool _SomeFlagSet = false;
public bool SomeFlag
{
get
{
if (!_SomeFlagSet)
SomeFlag = false;
return SomeFlag;
}
set
{
if (!_SomeFlagSet)
_SomeFlagSet = true;
SomeFlag = value;
}
}