Welcome to the Lounge

Gary Wheeler wrote:

it also ignores the fact that C# properties are merely syntactic sugar provided by the compiler around method calls, which makes the whole discussion rather pointless

Gary Wheeler wrote:

As always, the key is knowing which part of the blade is sharp

BobJanova wrote:

It's generally a good design principle to make it very difficult to get an object into an invalid state, by making property setters and state-changing methods throw if the thing you've asked them to do is invalid

Chris Maunder wrote:

Properties should be stable: that is, the value of a property shouldn't change “on its own". Rather, changes in properties are the results of calling property setters, or some other action changing the state of the object

Chris Maunder wrote:

Property getters should always succeed: they should never throw an exception. Return some reasonable default value if the property cannot be logically computed right now because the object is in a bad state.

Chris Maunder wrote:

What are your thoughts? Where am I going wrong in my thinking here?

public class MyObject
{
    public string Text { get; set; }

    public XElement AsXElement
    {
        get
        {
            XElement value = new XElement("ElementName",
                                          new XAttribute("text", this.Text));
            return value;
        }
        set
        {
            if (value != null)
            {
                this.Text = value.GetAttribute("text", "NO DATA");
            }
        }         
    }

    public MyObject(XElement value)
    {
        this.AsXElement = value;
    }
    
}

John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:

pun - LOL

Quote:

I abhor the all-or-nothing XML serialization/deserialization mechanism built into .Net

John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:

the property's value is considered due to the use of the INotifyPropertyChanged interface