Quick Remark.

I have a class that looks like this

[Serializable]
[XmlRoot("Class")]
public Class
{
[XmlAttribute]
public int Attribu
{
get{};set{};
}
[XmlAttribute]
public int Attribu
{
get{};set{};
}
}

Set up perfectly for Xml Serialization / Deserialization. One of the
great things about this is that if I, say, add a column to the
database, all I need to do is create the new public property on my
class. I do not have to say add a few lines to my SerializeToXml()
method, or add code to my DeserializeFromXml() method, since the
System.Xml.Serialization.XmlSerializer determines all that information
dynamically using Reflection. Okay, great, we have realized the
flexibility benefits from that.

But how do I set up my Deserialization constructor to work with that?
Consider:

public Class(string id)
{
string xml = FetchXml() // Get Xml representing this object
from somewhere. The ID is the key on the data.
Class instance = XmlSerializer.Deserialize(xml);
this.Attrib = instance.Attrib;
this.Attrib = instance.Attrib;
this.Attrib = instance.Attrib;
... ect.
}

You cant say
this = XmlSerializer.Deserialize(xml);

So - is there any way to Deserialize from xml and populate all the
properties in a CONSTRUCTOR without enumerating each property ?? I
guess I could use a static factory instead of a constructor.

Thoughts?

Separate "this" and the object that's actually being serialized. Say
normally you have a class like this:

[XmlRoot("Class")]
public class C {

private int _att;

[XmlAttribute] public int Att { get { return _att; } set { _att =
value; } }

}

Then separate it into two classes:

public class C {
private C_Data _data;
public int Att { get { return _data.Att; } set { _data.Att = value;
} }
}

[XmlRoot("Class")]
public class C_Data {
[XmlAttribute] publi int Att;
}

The calling code still just sees class C all the same, but internally
you use C_Data for serialization/deserialization and data storage.

Unfortunately C_Data actually has to be public, so put it in a
different namespace so as not to confuse callers.

HTH,

Sam


------------------------------------------------------------
We're hiring! B-Line Medical is seeking Mid/Sr. .NET
Developers for exciting positions in medical product
development in MD/DC. Work with a variety of technologies
in a relaxed team environment. See ads on Dice.com.



On 22 Jan 2007 19:40:45 -0800, "Hoss" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Quick Remark.
>
>I have a class that looks like this
>
>[Serializable]
>[XmlRoot("Class")]
>public Class
>{
> [XmlAttribute]
> public int Attribu
> {
> get{};set{};
> }
> [XmlAttribute]
> public int Attribu
> {
> get{};set{};
> }
>}
>
>Set up perfectly for Xml Serialization / Deserialization. One of the
>great things about this is that if I, say, add a column to the
>database, all I need to do is create the new public property on my
>class. I do not have to say add a few lines to my SerializeToXml()
>method, or add code to my DeserializeFromXml() method, since the
>System.Xml.Serialization.XmlSerializer determines all that information
>dynamically using Reflection. Okay, great, we have realized the
>flexibility benefits from that.
>
>But how do I set up my Deserialization constructor to work with that?
>Consider:
>
> public Class(string id)
> {
> string xml = FetchXml() // Get Xml representing this object
>from somewhere. The ID is the key on the data.
> Class instance = XmlSerializer.Deserialize(xml);
> this.Attrib = instance.Attrib;
> this.Attrib = instance.Attrib;
> this.Attrib = instance.Attrib;
> ... ect.
> }
>
>You cant say
>this = XmlSerializer.Deserialize(xml);
>
>So - is there any way to Deserialize from xml and populate all the
>properties in a CONSTRUCTOR without enumerating each property ?? I
>guess I could use a static factory instead of a constructor.
>
>Thoughts?