blocks|key|735718|text|在Properties+vs.+Methods一节中，.NET设计指南对这个问题提供了一些答案。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|735719|基本上，属性具有与字段相同的语义。你不应该让属性抛出异常，属性不应该有副作用，顺序不应该重要，属性应该相对较快地返回。如果这些事情都可能发生，最好使用一种方法。指南还建议使用返回数组的方法。|735720|在决定是否使用属性或方法时，如果我将其视为一个字段，则会有所帮助。我思考属性的行为，并问自己：“如果这是类上的一个字段，如果它的行为是这样的，我会感到惊讶吗？”例如，考虑TcpClient.GetStream+method。它可以根据是否建立了连接抛出几个异常，并且在尝试获取流之前配置TcpClient是很重要的。正因为如此，它是Get方法而不是属性。|735721|如果您仔细查看设计指南，就会发现这通常不是一个偏好问题；在某些情况下，使用方法而不是属性是有充分理由的。|735722|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bzwdh01d(VS.71).aspx#cpconpropertyusageguidelinesanchor1|1|http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.net.sockets.tcpclient.getstream.aspx^0|1|M|0|0|0|2D|Q|1|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|T|8|@]|9|@$A|U|B|V|1|W]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|Y|8|@]|9|@$A|Z|B|10|1|11]]|C|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|12|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]|$1|J|3|-4|5|6|7|13|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|K|$L|$5|M|N|O|C|$P|Q]]|R|$5|M|N|O|C|$P|S]]]]

The .NET design guidelines provide some answers to this question in the <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bzwdh01d(VS.71).aspx#cpconpropertyusageguidelinesanchor1" rel="noreferrer">Properties vs. Methods</a> section.

Basically, properties have the same semantics as a field. You shouldn't let a property throw exceptions, properties shouldn't have side effects, order shouldn't matter, and properties should return relatively quickly. If any of those things could happen, it's better to use a method. The guidelines also recommend using methods for returning arrays.

When deciding whether to use a property or method, it helps if I think of it like a field. I think about the behavior of the property and ask myself, "If this were a field on the class, would I be surprised if it behaved the way it does?" Consider, for example, the <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.net.sockets.tcpclient.getstream.aspx" rel="noreferrer">TcpClient.GetStream method</a>. It can throw several exceptions based on if the connection is made, and it's important that the TcpClient is configured before you try to get the stream. Because of this, it is a Get method rather than a property.

If you take a good look at the design guidelines, you'll see that it's usually not a matter of preference; there's good reasons to use methods instead of properties in certain cases.

blocks|key|5221419|text|如果你的语言支持属性，那就使用属性吧。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|5221420|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

If your language supports properties, just use properties.

blocks|key|3811293|text|使用属性。微软的框架设计指南一书中一个有趣的说明是，如果你有一个属性，并且需要为更复杂的set/get添加额外的方法，那么你应该去掉这个属性，只使用get/set方法。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|3811294|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

Use the properties. One interesting note from MS's framework design guidelines book is that if you have a property and need to add extra methods for more complex set/get, then you should eliminate the property and go with only get/set methods.

blocks|key|5221473|text|这完全是个人喜好。当它被编译时，它被证明是getter/setter函数。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|5221474|我个人在没有任何副作用的情况下设置和检索成员值时会使用属性。如果检索/保存值有副作用，那么我会使用一个函数。|5221475|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

This is all personal preference. When it gets compiled it turns out to be getter/setter functions either way.

I personally use properties when setting and retrieving member values without any side affects. If there are side affects to retrieving/saving the value, then I use a function.

blocks|key|3811354|text|我要说的是，总是问自己哪个更有意义。方法往往被理解为要执行的操作，并且通常是这样表述的-+open()、flush()、parse()。属性往往被理解为更花哨的字段/变量-+DisplayName、AutoSize、DataSource。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|3811355|在我注意到的自定义控件开发中，这往往会出现很多问题。由于它有可能被许多其他没有编写它的人使用，而您可能不会问，所以最好使用一个合乎逻辑且不会让您的开发人员同事感到惊讶的设计。|3811356|entityMap^0|19|6|1G|7|1O|7|2F|B|2R|8|30|A|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|J|8|@$9|K|A|L|B|C]|$9|M|A|N|B|C]|$9|O|A|P|B|C]|$9|Q|A|R|B|C]|$9|S|A|T|B|C]|$9|U|A|V|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|W|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|X|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|I|$]]

I'd say always ask yourself which makes more sense. Methods tend to be understood as actions to perform and are usually worded as such &mdash; <code>open()</code>, <code>flush()</code>, <code>parse()</code>. Properties tend to be understood as fancier fields/variables &mdash; <code>DisplayName</code>, <code>AutoSize</code>, <code>DataSource</code>.

This tends to come up a lot with custom control development I've noticed. Since it has the potential of being used by many other people down the road who didn't write it and you might not be around to ask, best go with a design that makes logical sense and doesn't surprise your fellow developers.

blocks|key|5221621|text|当一个值是只写的或者有多个值需要一次设置时(显然)，我倾向于使用setter。而且，和您一样，我的直觉是使用getter和setter作为进程可能长时间运行、产生线程或执行其他重要工作的信号。此外，如果setter在类中有不明显的先决条件，我可能会使用getter或setter，因为人们很少阅读有关属性的文档，并且属性应该是随时可访问的。但即使在这些情况下，我也可以使用一个属性，如果它可能会使调用代码读起来更好。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|5221622|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

I tend to use setters when a value is write-only or there are multiple values to be set at once (obviously). Also my instinct, like yours, is to use getters and setters as a signal that a process may be long-running, spawn threads, or do some other non-trivial work. Also, if a setter has non-obvious prerequisites in the class, I might use a getter or setter instead, since people rarely read documentation on properties, and properties are expected to be accessable at all times. But even in these circumstances I might use a property if it will potentially make the calling code read better.

blocks|key|3811478|text|忘记Getter和Setter方法。只要使用属性即可。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|3811479|值得一提的是，属性最终成为程序集中的Setter和/或Getter方法。Setter和/或Getter只需少量的元数据就可以成为一个属性。因此，实际上，properties+=+setter/getter方法。|3811480|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

Forget the Getter and Setter methods. Just use Properties. 

An interesting thing to mention is that Properties are ending up as Setter and/or Getter method(s) in the assembly. Setter and/or Getter become a Property just by a little bit of metadata. So in fact, properties = setter/getter methods.

blocks|key|5221802|text|属性应该是快速的，因为它们有一个就在那里的承诺。它们对于数据绑定也是必需的。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|5221803|而且他们应该有没有副作用的。|offset|length|style|BOLD|5221804|entityMap^0|0|7|6|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|K|8|@$D|L|E|M|F|G]]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|I|$]]

Properties should be fast, as they have a certain promise of just being there. They are also mandatory for databinding.

And they should have no side-effects.

blocks|key|5221915|text|微软的回答是好的，但我要为读写属性添加一些规则(微软有时会违反，顺便说一句，这会造成很多混乱)：(1)属性设置器通常不应该影响对象的可观察属性，这些对象不被认为是其属性被设置的对象的一部分；(2)将属性设置为一个值，然后另一个属性应使任何受影响的对象处于与简单地将其设置为第二个值相同的(可观察的)状态；(3)将属性设置为其getter返回的值不应具有可观察到的效果；(4)一般来说，设置属性不应导致任何其他读写属性更改，尽管它可能会更改其他只读属性(请注意，此规则的大多数违反将违反#2和/或#3，但即使这些规则不会被违反，这些设计仍然看起来可疑)。要使对象在设计器中可用，可能需要赋予它一些不遵循这些规则的属性，但不遵循这些语义的运行时更改应该由setter方法完成。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|5221916|在许多情况下，拥有一个只读属性和一个单独的"Set“方法可能是合适的(这是我的偏好，例如，控件的"Parent”属性)。在其他情况下，具有受一个读/写属性影响的多个相关ReadOnly属性可能是有用的(例如，具有指示控件及其所有父级是否可见的只读属性可能是有用的，但这种功能不应包含在读写可见属性中)。|5221917|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

Microsoft's answer is good, but I'd add a few more rules for read-write properties (which Microsoft violates sometimes, btw, causing much confusion): (1) A property setter should generally not affect the observable properties of objects which are not considered to be part of the object whose property is being set; (2) Setting a property to one value and then another should leave any affected objects in the same (observable) state as simply setting it to the second value; (3) Setting a property to the value returned by its getter should have no observable effect; (4) Generally, setting a property should not cause any other read-write properties to change, though it may change other read-only properties (note that most violations of this rule would violate #2 and/or #3, but even when those rules would not be violated such designs still seem dubious). Making an object usable in the designer may require giving it some properties which don't follow these rules, but run-time changes which will not follow such semantics should be done by setter methods.

In many cases, it may be appropriate to have a read-only property and a separate "Set" method (that would be my preference, for example, for a control's "Parent" property). In other cases, it may be useful to have several related ReadOnly properties that are affected by one read/write property (e.g. it may be useful to have a read-only property that indicates whether a control and all its parents are visible, but such functionality should not be included in a read-write Visible property).

It strikes me that Properties in C# should be use when trying to manipulate a field in the class. But when there's complex calculations or database involved, we should use a getter/setter.

Is this correct?

When do you use s/getter over properties?

Convention question: When do you use a Getter/Setter function rather than using a Property

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋 

腾讯云代码助手

CODING DevOps

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

我突然想到，当尝试操作类中的字段时，应该使用C#中的属性。但是当涉及到复杂的计算或数据库时，我们应该使用getter/setter。这是正确的吗？什么时候在属性上使用s/getter？

问约定问题:何时使用Getter/Setter函数而不是使用属性
EN

回答 9

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问约定问题:何时使用Getter/Setter函数而不是使用属性EN

回答 9

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问约定问题:何时使用Getter/Setter函数而不是使用属性
EN