The test is about a very simple thing: Why does the Assert.IsNull detect an empty property? when it's clear that it's not null. The proxy should give the call to the original property, I would think and evaluate the field? It is the field that is mapped through the property...
It seems from the explantion above, that lazy properties should only be used with auto properties. if that is true, then it would be nice to get an error... With clearer example, what do you mean with clearer? A more life test case? On Sep 10, 3:35 pm, Nexus <[email protected]> wrote: > First of all i looked in the contributed test, i do not understand > what your test is trying to prove, you are working with lazy > properties there, what you are not doing here. > > First of all i tried the nullpattern for the following class > > internal class Person > { > private Name name; > > protected Person() > { > } > > public Person(Name name) > : this() > { > this.name = name; > } > > public virtual Guid Id { get; set; } > > public virtual Name Name > { > get { return name = name ?? new Name(); } > } > } > > internal class Name > { > public string Firstname { get; set; } > public string Lastname { get; set; } > } > > This worked without even giving an itch, so i really do not understand > what is the problem here. > > If you do work with lazy properties be warned that even the > proxyvalidator will give you errors when trying to compile mappings > for not an auto property !!!, so the test you supplied is very very > strange > > I think we need a clearer example before we can understand what is > going on. > > Nexus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.
