C# Object Initializer Syntax
-
Just a personal preference, but I've come to dislike the look of this syntax. I think it's the indentation. StudentName student2 = new StudentName { FirstName = "Craig", LastName = "Playstead", }; vs StudentName student2 = new StudentName(); student2.FirstName = "Craig"; student2.LastName = "Playstead";
-
Just a personal preference, but I've come to dislike the look of this syntax. I think it's the indentation. StudentName student2 = new StudentName { FirstName = "Craig", LastName = "Playstead", }; vs StudentName student2 = new StudentName(); student2.FirstName = "Craig"; student2.LastName = "Playstead";
I like it when it's short enough to fit on a line:
StudentName student2 = new StudentName{FirstName = "Craig", LastName = "Playstead"};
But when it gets bigger than that I prefer the older form. Or, if it could indent it like this:
StudentName student2 = new StudentName{FirstName = "Craig",
LastName = "Playstead"};I'd be happy.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
-
I like it when it's short enough to fit on a line:
StudentName student2 = new StudentName{FirstName = "Craig", LastName = "Playstead"};
But when it gets bigger than that I prefer the older form. Or, if it could indent it like this:
StudentName student2 = new StudentName{FirstName = "Craig",
LastName = "Playstead"};I'd be happy.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
I always use your second style here, all function calls are broken up with one param per line, all neatly lined up. (I am so anal about code tidyness :) )
-
In C++11 you can just (when you have declared the proper constructor)
StudentName student2 = {"Craig", "Playstead"};
It would surprise me if C# had no corresponding way...
... such stuff as dreams are made on
megaadam wrote:
StudentName student2 = {"Craig", "Playstead"};
It hasn't, at least not that direct. The closest attainable solution is to define a constructor with needed parameters.
You always obtain more by being rather polite and armed than polite only.
-
Just a personal preference, but I've come to dislike the look of this syntax. I think it's the indentation. StudentName student2 = new StudentName { FirstName = "Craig", LastName = "Playstead", }; vs StudentName student2 = new StudentName(); student2.FirstName = "Craig"; student2.LastName = "Playstead";
-
Just a personal preference, but I've come to dislike the look of this syntax. I think it's the indentation. StudentName student2 = new StudentName { FirstName = "Craig", LastName = "Playstead", }; vs StudentName student2 = new StudentName(); student2.FirstName = "Craig"; student2.LastName = "Playstead";
StudentName student2 = new StudentName
{
FirstName = "Craig"
,LastName = "Playstead"
};Nothing at all wrong with that, and requires less typing than your preferred method. Of course, the ultimate in "less typing" is a constructor with a parameter for each property:
StudentName student2 = new StudentName("Craig", "Playstead");
In the end, your preference doesn't matter within the context of your employer's coding standards, and no matter which way you go, they all do essentially the same thing.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
megaadam wrote:
StudentName student2 = {"Craig", "Playstead"};
It hasn't, at least not that direct. The closest attainable solution is to define a constructor with needed parameters.
You always obtain more by being rather polite and armed than polite only.
Or the very subject of this topic, an object initializer:
StudentName student2 = new StudentName {"Craig", "Playstead"};Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. - Liber AL vel Legis 1:40, Aleister Crowley
-
StudentName student2 = new StudentName
{
FirstName = "Craig"
,LastName = "Playstead"
};Nothing at all wrong with that, and requires less typing than your preferred method. Of course, the ultimate in "less typing" is a constructor with a parameter for each property:
StudentName student2 = new StudentName("Craig", "Playstead");
In the end, your preference doesn't matter within the context of your employer's coding standards, and no matter which way you go, they all do essentially the same thing.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
Just a personal preference, but I've come to dislike the look of this syntax. I think it's the indentation. StudentName student2 = new StudentName { FirstName = "Craig", LastName = "Playstead", }; vs StudentName student2 = new StudentName(); student2.FirstName = "Craig"; student2.LastName = "Playstead";
Not only that. It does not introduce any real benefit. Sure, the inititialisation now is atomic, but that can become a pain when debugging (which one of those 4000 fields threw that exception during the initialisation?) and actually is not needed so often.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns. -
Not only that. It does not introduce any real benefit. Sure, the inititialisation now is atomic, but that can become a pain when debugging (which one of those 4000 fields threw that exception during the initialisation?) and actually is not needed so often.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns. -
I had that problem with a data object for a database table with about 150 columns (a monstrosity by itself). Somewhere in the initialisation a simple null reference exception occured, but for which column. But my cow-orkers insisted on using the initializers because they are soooo cool (why, exactly?), muuuuuch more readable (why, exactly?) and because they are atomic (which we needed for what reason, exactly?).
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns. -
I moved the comma because when you're typing that initializer, you need to type a space (or the first letter of a property name that hasn't already been initialized) for intellisense to work. Keeps things lined up as well until I can fiddle with it a little more to make it pretty. :)
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
Not only that. It does not introduce any real benefit. Sure, the inititialisation now is atomic, but that can become a pain when debugging (which one of those 4000 fields threw that exception during the initialisation?) and actually is not needed so often.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.- If you can't discern which of the properties is throwing the exception, maybe you should let someone else do the debugging. 1) If you have 400 properties that need to be initialized in an object, maybe you should rethink your design and pass a single model object (or a limited number of model objects) to a constructor and debug in the object being initialized. 2) After my first experience with a null reference exception as a result of a database query, I started writing my stored procs in such a way as to NOT return null values for any column.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
StudentName student2 = new StudentName
{
FirstName = "Craig"
,LastName = "Playstead"
};Nothing at all wrong with that, and requires less typing than your preferred method. Of course, the ultimate in "less typing" is a constructor with a parameter for each property:
StudentName student2 = new StudentName("Craig", "Playstead");
In the end, your preference doesn't matter within the context of your employer's coding standards, and no matter which way you go, they all do essentially the same thing.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Nothing at all wrong with that,
Except for the leading comma, which is an abomination. :) I see people use that in SQL queries, who argue that it makes it easier to rearrange the lines without having to remember to add/remove the comma. But it doesn't - you've just moved the problem from the end of the list to the start of the list. And in C#, that's not even a real problem. You can have a trailing comma on every item, including the last:
StudentName student2 = new StudentName
{
FirstName = "Craig",
LastName = "Playstead",
};As for invoking Intellisense, Ctrl+Space will do the trick without having to insert extra spaces. :)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
Not only that. It does not introduce any real benefit. Sure, the inititialisation now is atomic, but that can become a pain when debugging (which one of those 4000 fields threw that exception during the initialisation?) and actually is not needed so often.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.CDP1802 wrote:
It does not introduce any real benefit.
Lambda expressions? LINQ? Anonymous types? There are plenty of cases where you need to initialize a new object but you can't use multiple statements to do it. If you've never encountered one, then feel free to ignore the syntax. But that doesn't mean they don't exist! :)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
- If you can't discern which of the properties is throwing the exception, maybe you should let someone else do the debugging. 1) If you have 400 properties that need to be initialized in an object, maybe you should rethink your design and pass a single model object (or a limited number of model objects) to a constructor and debug in the object being initialized. 2) After my first experience with a null reference exception as a result of a database query, I started writing my stored procs in such a way as to NOT return null values for any column.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013- I did that by leaving the company. 1) Agreed, but it was not my design and the last survivor of the original 'designers' was the company's second in command who took any proposals as a personal insult. Another good reason to leave that place.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns. -
CDP1802 wrote:
It does not introduce any real benefit.
Lambda expressions? LINQ? Anonymous types? There are plenty of cases where you need to initialize a new object but you can't use multiple statements to do it. If you've never encountered one, then feel free to ignore the syntax. But that doesn't mean they don't exist! :)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
I try to avoid such an unreadable mess where I can. Initializing objects with many members within some other construct is an unreadable mess.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns. -
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Nothing at all wrong with that,
Except for the leading comma, which is an abomination. :) I see people use that in SQL queries, who argue that it makes it easier to rearrange the lines without having to remember to add/remove the comma. But it doesn't - you've just moved the problem from the end of the list to the start of the list. And in C#, that's not even a real problem. You can have a trailing comma on every item, including the last:
StudentName student2 = new StudentName
{
FirstName = "Craig",
LastName = "Playstead",
};As for invoking Intellisense, Ctrl+Space will do the trick without having to insert extra spaces. :)
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
I view the trailing unnecessary comma as an abomination. :)
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
