> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Day [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 7:27 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] Do properties need a
> 'holder' keyword?
> >
> > I know that when using properties there are a lot of read only (get
> > accessor only) properties which would be useful to have
> auto-generated
> > for me. Think of the Count property in a collection.
> Internally it's
> > read/write but externally the property has a get accessor only.
> >
> > Having a short-hand way to do this would be cool.
> >
> > Chris
> >
>
> It would be nice if property getters/setters could have
> individual access modifiers.
>
> That way you can do something like:
>
> public int Count { get { return _count; } }
> private int Count { set { _count = value; } }
Afaik, you can. Define the property get on another interface
than the set. Then implement the interface directly:
protected int IFoo.Count {{ get return _count;}}
public int IBar.Count {{ set _count=value;}}
IBar then inherits from IFoo, so when you do not want the set,
cast to IFoo.
FB
===================================
This list is hosted by DevelopMentorŪ http://www.develop.com
NEW! ASP.NET courses you may be interested in:
2 Days of ASP.NET, 29 Sept 2003, in Redmond
http://www.develop.com/courses/2daspdotnet
Guerrilla ASP.NET, 13 Oct 2003, in Boston
http://www.develop.com/courses/gaspdotnet
View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
