Hi

I have something like:

public bool Data;

which is fine - but I want so do something when set - is there a
simple solution for that?

public bool Data
{
get { return value ]
set { set value; DoSomething(); }
}

The value could be the same, the only "change" I want is the
"DoSomething"

Is that possible?

On 08/03/2011 in message
<5cc159e4-abb9-4485-9140-(E-Mail Removed)>
jodleren wrote:

>Hi
>
>I have something like:
>
>public bool Data;
>
>which is fine - but I want so do something when set - is there a
>simple solution for that?
>
>public bool Data
>{
> get { return value ]
> set { set value; DoSomething(); }
>}
>
>The value could be the same, the only "change" I want is the
>"DoSomething"
>
>Is that possible?

What I do is have a private function called SetData:

private void SetData(bool value)
{
Do what's needed
}

and then:

public bool Data
{
get { return value ]
set { SetData( value);}
}



--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his friends for his
life.
(Jeremy Thorpe, 1962)

"jodleren" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:5cc159e4-abb9-4485-9140-(E-Mail Removed)...

> I have something like:
>
> public bool Data;
>
> which is fine - but I want so do something when set - is there a
> simple solution for that?
>
> public bool Data
> {
> get { return value ]
> set { set value; DoSomething(); }
> }
>
> The value could be the same, the only "change" I want is the
> "DoSomething"
>
> Is that possible?

Yes, you've just described "properties." The only thing you're missing is a
backing store for the property (which should NOT be named Data; I'm going to
call it Bob):

private bool _bob;
public bool Bob
{
get { return _bob; }
set
{
_bob = value;
DoSomething();
}
}

On Mar 8, 5:32*pm, "Jeff Johnson" <i....@enough.spam> wrote:
> "jodleren" <sonn...@hot.ee> wrote in message
>
> news:5cc159e4-abb9-4485-9140-(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>
>
> > I have something like:
>
> > public bool Data;
>
> > which is fine - but I want so do something when set - is there a
> > simple solution for that?
>
> > public bool Data
> > {
> > * *get { return value ]
> > * set { set value; DoSomething(); }
> > }
>
> > The value could be the same, the only "change" I want is the
> > "DoSomething"
>
> > Is that possible?
>
> Yes, you've just described "properties." The only thing you're missing isa
> backing store for the property (which should NOT be named Data; I'm goingto
> call it Bob):
>
> private bool _bob;
> public bool Bob
> {
> * * get { return _bob; }
> * * set
> * * {
> * * * * _bob = value;
> * * * * DoSomething();
> * * }
>
> }

Thanks
I just hoped there would be an easier option.

But what about:

public List<string> JohnDone = new....

How would you catch changes in there?

components.JohnDone.Add("one more");
components.JohnDone[0] = "empty"


WBR
Sonnich

"jodleren" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:c9dcbbe3-15f1-4dd5-b47e-(E-Mail Removed)...

> But what about:

> public List<string> JohnDone = new....

> How would you catch changes in there?

I've never looked into the BindingList<T> that Pete mentioned, so personally
I'd create my own collection class, delegate most of its functionality to
the List<T> that I use as the backing store, and add code to methods that
change the list, like Add, Clear, Insert, and Remove to do whatever it is I
want to do when the list changes.

On 08-03-2011 11:17, jodleren wrote:
> On Mar 8, 5:32 pm, "Jeff Johnson"<i....@enough.spam> wrote:
>> "jodleren"<sonn...@hot.ee> wrote in message
>> news:5cc159e4-abb9-4485-9140-(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> I have something like:
>>
>>> public bool Data;
>>
>>> which is fine - but I want so do something when set - is there a
>>> simple solution for that?
>>
>>> public bool Data
>>> {
>>> get { return value ]
>>> set { set value; DoSomething(); }
>>> }
>>
>>> The value could be the same, the only "change" I want is the
>>> "DoSomething"
>>
>>> Is that possible?
>>
>> Yes, you've just described "properties." The only thing you're missing is a
>> backing store for the property (which should NOT be named Data; I'm going to
>> call it Bob):
>>
>> private bool _bob;
>> public bool Bob
>> {
>> get { return _bob; }
>> set
>> {
>> _bob = value;
>> DoSomething();
>> }
>>
>> }
>
> I just hoped there would be an easier option.

That is an easy option!

> But what about:
>
> public List<string> JohnDone = new....
>
> How would you catch changes in there?
>
> components.JohnDone.Add("one more");
> components.JohnDone[0] = "empty"

Make the field private, if you need a property then
make only a get that return a readonly list and add
methods that do the modifications of the list.

That is good encapsulation.

Arne

On 08-03-2011 10:32, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> "jodleren"<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:5cc159e4-abb9-4485-9140-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> I have something like:
>>
>> public bool Data;
>>
>> which is fine - but I want so do something when set - is there a
>> simple solution for that?
>>
>> public bool Data
>> {
>> get { return value ]
>> set { set value; DoSomething(); }
>> }
>>
>> The value could be the same, the only "change" I want is the
>> "DoSomething"
>>
>> Is that possible?
>
> Yes, you've just described "properties." The only thing you're missing is a
> backing store for the property (which should NOT be named Data; I'm going to
> call it Bob):
>
> private bool _bob;
> public bool Bob
> {
> get { return _bob; }
> set
> {
> _bob = value;
> DoSomething();
> }
> }

Note that in some cases it can be important whether you assign
or call DoSomething first.

Arne

"Arne Vajhøj" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4d76be7c$0$23753$(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 08-03-2011 10:32, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>> "jodleren"<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:5cc159e4-abb9-4485-9140-(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> I have something like:
>>>
>>> public bool Data;
>>>
>>> which is fine - but I want so do something when set - is there a
>>> simple solution for that?
>>>
>>> public bool Data
>>> {
>>> get { return value ]
>>> set { set value; DoSomething(); }
>>> }
>>>
>>> The value could be the same, the only "change" I want is the
>>> "DoSomething"
>>>
>>> Is that possible?
>>
>> Yes, you've just described "properties." The only thing you're missing is
>> a
>> backing store for the property (which should NOT be named Data; I'm going
>> to
>> call it Bob):
>>
>> private bool _bob;
>> public bool Bob
>> {
>> get { return _bob; }
>> set
>> {
>> _bob = value;
>> DoSomething();
>> }
>> }
>
> Note that in some cases it can be important whether you assign
> or call DoSomething first.

Of course. It might also be important to only call DoSomething if the value
of the property is changing, so an if test might be needed. And so on....