C# Changing a constant - c#

I have inherited a small windows form based program written in C# that uses a 'constant' (See below), I need to modify this program so 'PROPERTY_NAME' can be "jobs" and "careers".
private const string PROPERTY_NAME = "jobs";
I'm guessing a constant isn't designed to change so should I need to change this. The line above is set once at the top of a class file and then PROPERTY_NAME is used throughout that file.
On the main form I would like to add two radio buttons 1 called 'jobs' and one called 'careers' and then change the PROPERTY_NAME in the class file based on which is selected. Would I need to pass the radio button status to the method in the class file? I recall reading that I can't simply read the radio button value from the class file.
Many thanks for your advice.
Jane

My best (and simplest) guess (I could elaborate into cleaner things but this is just for speed) without seeing any other part of the code would be to remove the const and add readonly so PROPERTY_NAME is just a plain old class member variable that cannot change outside of the constructor.
In the class's constructor, take in a string parameter, and have the code that creates an instance of this class pass in either "jobs" or "careers" (coming from the selected radio button probably) and set the PROPERTY_NAME variable.
EDIT:
Like Sasha says, another way would be using an enum but it depends what exactly is being done with PROPERTY_NAME as to whether this is appropriate for your application.

If the quantity you are representing changes ever throughout the history of the universe then do not make it a constant. Constants are things like the number of eggs in a dozen or the atomic weight of lead. Things like version numbers or the current price of gold change over time and therefore are not constant. Only make actually constant values into constant fields. The compiler will treat constant fields as constant for all time, which can introduce semantic errors if they change.

make an enum (my preferred way) and make it a readonly property. Set this property in the constructor. It isn't changeable after creation and should do what you need.
-sa

You cannot make constant having two values. It looks like that you need to make a field storing current property name and use it allover your form. And you will be able to init such field from the radio button.

Related

Mark values as being entered by user or calculated by application

I'm currently planning a new application. The values used in this application can either be entered by the user or calculated by the application itself.
What I need to do is to mark the values in a way that I can clearly identify the source (user or app).
EDIT (additional information): The idea is not to identify that a user can input a value or not. The idea is to clearly have the possibility to flag values as being calculated or entered by the users. The value will not only be used in the view but also in calculations.
A class A would have a double v. This double can either be calculated or have been entered by a user.
class A
{
public double v; // <-- this would be the value I'd like to mark as program-defined or user defined
}
So, when I do this:
v = 1.0;
it would be marked as program-defined.
Has anyone a hint on how to achieve this in C#?
In C++ I would create a base class and derive from it. But in C# I would like to take a more general approach which doesn't force me to create a class per input type.
Any ideas on how to achieve this?
Thanks.
If you are looking for way to mark some properties or classes that they are used for user input or internally you can use attributes for this. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/attributes/writing-custom-attributes
Have a general class that implements a variable which identifies whether or not it is a value entered by the app or the user.
Possible variable types:
a string ('user', 'app' ...)
an enum, so if the enum is called Source it will be Source.User, if app Source.App.
an integer (as ID)
If you have a limited amount of types I'd personally go with an enum as it allows you to have suggested options. If you have many types I'd go with a string or an integer.

Using attributes to observe a variable

I am planning to make something like setting an attribute to a variable in any class and be able to observe the changes to the variable from another class is this possible. Basically what I am trying is tagging a variable with a certain name and collect all the named variables and display it in screen and be able to change the observe and consume the changes to the variable. Is this possible with attributes or any other feature in c#?
Thanks for your time!
Fl#my!

DataType to store control type Windows Forms C#

Trying a simple project to create my own (very basic) data binding.
I have a class FIELD_DESCRIPTOR which stores meta information about a database column. There will be a further class FIELD which represents the actual field, which will contain a reference to its corresponding FIELD_DESCRIPTOR class.
I am getting stuck in 2 places.
First, I need to have a property in the FIELD_DESCRIPTOR class that stores what kind of Windows Forms control the field is mapped to at the front end. for e.g. I need a property, say, MAPPED_CONTROL_TYPE. And I should be able to store either TextBox, ComboBox etc in this property. Should I just use a string property and be done with it ? Or is there a better way ? Ideally, I'd like to use some kind of enumeration of control types.
Secondly, I need to store a reference / handle to the actual control the field it mapped to. (I think I can do this by passing a reference of the actual control on the form.)
How do I implement this ? What kind of dataType should be used to define this property ?
(Using .Net 3.5, No WPF)
Thanks and regards.
First, I need to have a property in the FIELD_DESCRIPTOR class that
stores what kind of Windows Forms control the field is mapped to at
the front end. for e.g. I need a property, say, MAPPED_CONTROL_TYPE.
And I should be able to store either TextBox, ComboBox etc in this
property. Should I just use a string property and be done with it ? Or
is there a better way ? Ideally, I'd like to use some kind of
enumeration of control types.
The fully qualified type name springs to mind, e.g. System.Windows.Forms.TextBox. This should be unique, and could always be used for dynamic creation if needed.
Secondly, I need to store a reference / handle to the actual control
the field it mapped to. (I think I can do this by passing a reference
of the actual control on the form.)
You could indeed store the reference using a type such as System.Windows.Forms.Control. If you do, be carefult that you don't create a memory leak. i.e. When you control is no longer needed, you should no longer hold its reference in your lookup otherwise you will stop it being disposed.

Why should I use an automatically implemented property instead of a field?

Between these two:
With Property:
class WithProperty
{
public string MyString {get; set;}
}
With Field:
class WithField
{
public string MyString;
}
Apparently I'm supposed to pick the first one. Why?
I've heard the argument that the point here is to allow interface changes, but
if I have the second one, and change it to the first one, no other code should
ever have to change. When recompiled everything's just going to point to the
property instead.
Am I missing something important here?
The most important difference is the fact, that if you use a field, and later need to change it to a property (say, to enforce some validation), then all libraries calling your code will need to be recompiled. It's true that you can compile the exact same code if the name stays the same - but the consumers of your code will still need to be recompiled. This is because the IL generated to get the value is different between a field and a property. If it already is a property, you can make a change without forcing consumers of your code to change.
This may or may not be an issue for you. But the property is almost the same amount of code, and is considered best practice. I would always go for the property.
The property can be changed later if you need to add validation or other logic without breaking other assemblies.
Also, the property can be used with databinding.
The important part you are missing is the gravity of this statement:
When recompiled
When your code point to a field and you change it to point to a property of the same name, the C# itself doesn't change, but the resulting IL does - it generates a method call to the getter or setter as appropriate.
Not every app has all of it's pieces contained in a single distributed unit. Many apps rely on interfaces for pluggability/expandability. If you have an app with an interface to a field and you want to change it to a property to take advantage of the power of properties, the app has to be recompiled and redistributed. You might as well just make it a property in the first place.
With a property, you can easily extend it to include new logic.
For example, if you need to add validation logic to the set.
This article goes into several additional reasons why you should prefer properties:
http://csharpindepth.com/Articles/Chapter8/PropertiesMatter.aspx

Properties vs Methods

Quick question: When do you decide to use properties (in C#) and when do you decide to use methods?
We are busy having this debate and have found some areas where it is debatable whether we should use a property or a method. One example is this:
public void SetLabel(string text)
{
Label.Text = text;
}
In the example, Label is a control on a ASPX page. Is there a principle that can govern the decision (in this case) whether to make this a method or a property.
I'll accept the answer that is most general and comprehensive, but that also touches on the example that I have given.
From the Choosing Between Properties and Methods section of Design Guidelines for Developing Class Libraries:
In general, methods represent actions and properties represent data. Properties are meant to be used like fields, meaning that properties should not be computationally complex or produce side effects. When it does not violate the following guidelines, consider using a property, rather than a method, because less experienced developers find properties easier to use.
Yes, if all you're doing is getting and setting, use a property.
If you're doing something complex that may affect several data members, a method is more appropriate. Or if your getter takes parameters or your setter takes more than a value parameter.
In the middle is a grey area where the line can be a little blurred. There is no hard and fast rule and different people will sometimes disagree whether something should be a property or a method. The important thing is just to be (relatively) consistent with how you do it (or how your team does it).
They are largely interchangeable but a property signals to the user that the implementation is relatively "simple". Oh and the syntax is a little cleaner.
Generally speaking, my philosophy is that if you start writing a method name that begins with get or set and takes zero or one parameter (respectively) then it's a prime candidate for a property.
Searching through MSDN, I found a reference on Properties vs Methods that provides some great guidelines for creating methods:
The operation is a conversion, such as Object.ToString.
The operation is expensive enough that you want to communicate to the
user that they should consider caching
the result.
Obtaining a property value using the get accessor would have an observable
side effect.
Calling the member twice in succession produces different results.
The order of execution is important. Note that a type's properties should
be able to be set and retrieved in any
order.
The member is static but returns a value that can be changed.
The member returns an array. Properties that return arrays can be
very misleading. Usually it is
necessary to return a copy of the
internal array so that the user cannot
change internal state. This, coupled
with the fact that a user can easily
assume it is an indexed property,
leads to inefficient code.
If you're setting an actual property of your object then you use a property.
If you're performing a task / functionality then you use a method.
In your example, it is a definite property being set.
If however, your functionality was to AppendToLabel then you would use a method.
Properties are a way to inject or retrieve data from an object. They create an abstraction over variables or data within a class. They are analogous to getters and setters in Java.
Methods encapsulate an operation.
In general I use properties to expose single bits of data, or small calculations on a class, like sales tax. Which is derived from the number of items and their cost in a shopping cart.
I use methods when I create an operation, like retrieving data from the database. Any operation that has moving parts, is a candidate for a method.
In your code example I would wrap it in a property if I need to access it outside it's containing class:
public Label Title
{
get{ return titleLabel;}
set{ titleLabel = value;}
}
Setting the text:
Title.Text = "Properties vs Methods";
If I was only setting the Text property of the Label this is how I would do it:
public string Title
{
get{ return titleLabel.Text;}
set{ titleLabel.Text = value;}
}
Setting the text:
Title = "Properties vs Methods";
Symantically properties are attributes of your objects.
Methods are behaviors of your object.
Label is an attribute and it makes more sense to make it a property.
In terms of Object Oriented Programming you should have a clear understanding of what is part of behavior and what is merely an attribute.
Car { Color, Model, Brand }
A car has Color, Model and Brand attributes therefore it does not make sense to have a method SetColor or SetModel because symantically we do not ask Car to set its own color.
So if you map the property/method case to the real life object or look at it from symantic view point, your confusion will really go away.
You need only look at the very name... "Property". What does it mean? The dictionary defines it in many ways, but in this case "an essential or distinctive attribute or quality of a thing" fits best.
Think about the purpose of the action. Are you, in fact, altering or retrieving "an essential or distinctive attribute"? In your example, you are using a function to set a property of a textbox. That seems kind of silly, does it not?
Properties really are functions. They all compile down to getXXX() and setXXX(). It just hides them in syntactic sugar, but it's sugar that provides a semantic meaning to the process.
Think about properties like attributes. A car has many attributes. Color, MPG, Model, etc.. Not all properties are setable, some are calculatable.
Meanwhile, a Method is an action. GetColor should be a property. GetFile() should be a function. Another rule of thumb is, if it doesn't change the state of the object, then it should be a function. For example, CalculatePiToNthDigit(n) should be a function, because it's not actually changing the state of the Math object it's attached to.
This is maybe rambling a bit, but it really boils down to deciding what your objects are, and what they represent. If you can't figure out if it should be a property or function, maybe it doesn't matter which.
Properties should only be simple set and get one liners. Anything more and it should really be moved to a method. Complex code should always be in methods.
I only use properties for variable access, i.e. getting and setting individual variables, or getting and setting data in controls. As soon as any kind of data manipulation is needed/performed, I use methods.
As a matter of design Properties represent Data or Attributes of class object, While methods are actions or behaviors of class object.
In .Net, world there are other implications of using Properties:
Properties are used in Databinding, while get_ / set_ methods are not.
XML serialization user properties as natural mechanism of serilization.
Properties are accessed by PropertyGrid control and intern ICustomTypeDescriptor, which can be used effectively if you are writing a custom library.
Properties are controlled by Attributes, one can use it wisely to design Aspect Oriented softwares.
Misconceptions (IMHO) about Properties' usage:
Used to expose small calculations: ControlDesigner.SelectionRules's get block runs into 72 lines!!
Used to expose internal Data structures: Even if a property does not map to an internal data member, one can use it as property, if its an attribute of your class. Viceversa, even if its an attribute of your class properties are not advisable, to return array like data members (instead methods are used to return deep copy of members.)
In the example here it could have been written, with more business meaning as:
public String Title
{
set { Label.Text = text; }
}
Also big plus for Properties is that value of property can be seen in Visual Studio during debugging.
I prefer to use properties for add/set methods with 1 parameter. If parameters are more, use methods.
Properties are really nice because they are accessible in the visual designer of visual studio, provided they have access.
They use be used were you are merely setting and getting and perhaps some validation that does not access a significant amount of code. Be careful because creating complex objects during validation is not simple.
Anything else methods are the preferred way.
It's not just about semantics. Using properties inappropriate start having weirdness occur in the visual studio visual designer.
For instance I was getting a configuration value within a property of a class. The configuration class actually opens a file and runs an sql query to get the value of that configuration. This caused problems in my application where the configuration file would get opened and locked by visual studio itself rather than my application because was not only reading but writing the configuration value (via the setter method). To fix this I just had to change it to a method.
Here is a good set of guidelines for when to use properties vs methods from Bill Wagner
Use a Property when all these are true:
The getters should be simple and thus unlikely to throw exceptions. Note that this implies no network (or database) access. Either might fail, and therefore would throw an exception.
They should not have dependencies on each other. Note that this would include setting one property and having it affect another. (For example, setting the FirstName property would affect a read-only FullName property that composed the first name + last name properties implies such a dependency )
They should be settable in any order
The getter does not have an observable side effect Note this guideline doesn't preclude some forms of lazy evaluation in a property.
The method must always return immediately. (Note that this precludes a property that makes a database access call, web service call, or other similar operation).
Use a method if the member returns an array.
Repeated calls to the getter (without intervening code) should return the same value.
Repeated calls to the setter (with the same value) should yield no difference from a single call.
The get should not return a reference to internal data structures (See item 23). A method could return a deep copy, and could avoid this issue.
*Taken from my answer to a duplicate question.
This is simple.
1: use property when you want your data should be validated before storing in field. So in this way property provides encapsulation for your fields. Because if you leave your fields public end user may assign any value which may or may not be valid as per your business requirement like age should be greater than 18. So before value is store corresponding field we need to check its validity. In this way properties represent data.
2: Use method when you want perform some action like you are supplying some data as parameter and your method is doing some processing on the basis of supplied values and returning processed value as output. Or you want to change value of some field by this calculation. "In this way method represents action".
I come from java an i used get.. set.. method for a while.
When i write code, i don't ask to my self: "accessing this data is simple or require a heavy process?" because things can change (today retrive this property is simple, tomonrow can require some or heavy process).
Today i have a method SetAge(int age) tomonrow i will have also method SetAge(date birthdate) that calculate the age using the birthdate.
I was very disappointed that the compiler transform property in get and set but don't consider my Get... and Set.. methods as the same.

Categories