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";
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 -
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 :) )
-
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
Give it another iteration of new language features and we'll probably have the even shorter C++ version. At times I wish they went faster but at least MS is steadily chipping away at language verbosity in C#; unlike Sun/whOracle who seem to revel in Java's bloatyness. :doh:
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
-
Chris C-B wrote:
Anything that gets rid of squirly brackets has got to be good.
Long live VB! :thumbsup::cool:
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
My thoughts exactly! :laugh:
Read my (free) ebook Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly. Visit my blog at Sander's bits - Writing the code you need. Or read my articles here on CodeProject.
Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability. — Edsger W. Dijkstra
Regards, Sander
-
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 the first. Less typing and more readable.
#SupportHeForShe Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
-
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:
4000 fields
:omg: I think I've located your problem.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)
