Comments on: Automatic properties with custom logic – part 2 http://blog.somecreativity.com/2008/10/29/automatic-properties-with-custom-logic-%e2%80%93-part-2/ Weblog of Siddharth Uppal Sun, 21 Feb 2010 10:50:19 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Sid http://blog.somecreativity.com/2008/10/29/automatic-properties-with-custom-logic-%e2%80%93-part-2/#comment-4718 Sid Thu, 30 Oct 2008 20:38:12 +0000 http://siddhu.wordpress.com/?p=509#comment-4718 Having a virtual Taxable property makes the scenario of the same item becoming non-taxable a bit twisted. That said - there are multiple ways to skin a cat. My approach seemed a natural succession of automatic properties. Having a virtual Taxable property makes the scenario of the same item becoming non-taxable a bit twisted. That said – there are multiple ways to skin a cat. My approach seemed a natural succession of automatic properties.

]]> By: Jd http://blog.somecreativity.com/2008/10/29/automatic-properties-with-custom-logic-%e2%80%93-part-2/#comment-4717 Jd Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:46:40 +0000 http://siddhu.wordpress.com/?p=509#comment-4717 In such a scenario, you can make Taxable property as virtual and create another derived class named TaxableShoppingCartItem, in which you mark taxable = True, regardless of TaxId. I am not able to think of the scenario where one would need what you are looking for. In such a scenario, you can make Taxable property as virtual and create another derived class named TaxableShoppingCartItem, in which you mark taxable = True, regardless of TaxId. I am not able to think of the scenario where one would need what you are looking for.

]]> By: Sid http://blog.somecreativity.com/2008/10/29/automatic-properties-with-custom-logic-%e2%80%93-part-2/#comment-4716 Sid Wed, 29 Oct 2008 21:26:08 +0000 http://siddhu.wordpress.com/?p=509#comment-4716 That's not against the business rule. As I said in the beginning, there can be items that have a non-zero TaxID but are not taxed because of some logic elsewhere - customer has a special tax exempt status or something. Having a Taxable flag on the item makes those areas of code that just need to know whether an item is taxable or not simpler (they don't need to know the business rule that those with a taxid of zero are non-taxable... also this logic for determining taxable items might change in the future). That’s not against the business rule. As I said in the beginning, there can be items that have a non-zero TaxID but are not taxed because of some logic elsewhere – customer has a special tax exempt status or something. Having a Taxable flag on the item makes those areas of code that just need to know whether an item is taxable or not simpler (they don’t need to know the business rule that those with a taxid of zero are non-taxable… also this logic for determining taxable items might change in the future).

]]> By: Jd http://blog.somecreativity.com/2008/10/29/automatic-properties-with-custom-logic-%e2%80%93-part-2/#comment-4715 Jd Wed, 29 Oct 2008 21:18:03 +0000 http://siddhu.wordpress.com/?p=509#comment-4715 I am sorry, but I think you have it backwards. If your property Taxable is a dependent property (on TaxId), then you make Taxable readonly and derive it from TaxId inside your code. The simpler solution will be: public class ShoppingCartItem { public int TaxID { get; set; } public bool Taxable { get { return TaxID > 0 ? true : false; } } } This also solves your problem of keeping 'Taxable' in sync with TaxId. In your scenario, someone can set Taxable property to false even when TaxId > 0 which is against the business rule. I am sorry, but I think you have it backwards. If your property Taxable is a dependent property (on TaxId), then you make Taxable readonly and derive it from TaxId inside your code.

The simpler solution will be:

public class ShoppingCartItem
{
public int TaxID { get; set; }
public bool Taxable
{
get { return TaxID > 0 ? true : false; }
}
}

This also solves your problem of keeping ‘Taxable’ in sync with TaxId. In your scenario, someone can set Taxable property to false even when TaxId > 0 which is against the business rule.

]]> By: Automatic properties with custom logic « Some Creativity http://blog.somecreativity.com/2008/10/29/automatic-properties-with-custom-logic-%e2%80%93-part-2/#comment-4714 Automatic properties with custom logic « Some Creativity Wed, 29 Oct 2008 20:58:37 +0000 http://siddhu.wordpress.com/?p=509#comment-4714 [...] Update:Check out part 2 where I take an example to bring the problem into perspective and propose a solution… Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)PSA: Bindable Setters Don’t Fire!Using optional private field param to register property to waive loadPropertyCustom field types for SharePoint [...] [...] Update:Check out part 2 where I take an example to bring the problem into perspective and propose a solution… Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)PSA: Bindable Setters Don’t Fire!Using optional private field param to register property to waive loadPropertyCustom field types for SharePoint [...]

]]>