Using {set; get;} instead of {get; set;}

Question

In C# and its cousin languages, we always use

public string SomeString { get; set;}

But you can also use ( I found this out only recently and while fooling around with the compiler )

public string SomeString { set; get; }

I do not have any formal training in programming and everything is self-tought. I have been using { get; set; } without any thought just like we use 1 + 1 = 2 Is the order of { get; set; } just a convention or is it necessary to maintain this order or is it some remnant of a bygone era of C history like the way we define conventional electric current flowing from positive to the negative terminal when it is actually the other way around?

Fix your second code sample; you've skipped the variable name. — Dariusz
– Dariusz, Commented Oct 14, 2013 at 11:29
@Dariusz Wouldn't it have been easier to edit the question, rather than post a comment requesting the OP edit it? — David Arno
– David Arno, Commented Oct 14, 2013 at 11:31
@DavidArno the community frowns upon editing code in questions. Search the meta. While this is a fairly obvious case, I wasn't 101% certain it wasn't an error. — Dariusz
– Dariusz, Commented Oct 14, 2013 at 11:32
@Dariusz, Thanks, I didn't know that. I've been naively editing bad indentation and obvious typos unrelated to the question. I'd best stop though if that's the wrong thing to do. — David Arno
– David Arno, Commented Oct 14, 2013 at 11:34
@DavidArno I don't say I think what you did is wrong. I just don't like to take chances. If it was an answer, I would've edited the code too. — Dariusz
– Dariusz, Commented Oct 14, 2013 at 11:35

David Arno · Accepted Answer · 2013-10-14 11:28:54Z

9

It is purely a convention. It makes no difference which order they appear in.

answered Oct 14, 2013 at 11:28

David Arno

43.4k16 gold badges89 silver badges132 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

3 Comments

Brad Christie Over a year ago

This is on par with what order you overload ToString() or GetHashCode(). Property accessors are just shortcuts to get_varname/set_varname methods.

David Arno Over a year ago

Be careful with the "are just shortcuts to" claim. I can't write a method get_X() and then reference it as X. The concept of properties exists in the CLR and thus X becomes get_X() with "I'm a property" metadata.

Brad Christie Over a year ago

My apologies. I wasnt inferring there's a direct correlation, just insight in to behind the scenes.

Dariusz · Accepted Answer · 2013-10-14 13:04:16Z

There is no difference.

It is exactly as if you had implemented the getter first in your class body, and the setter after it. The functions would still do exactly the same:

public String getSomeString() { return someString; }
public void setSomeString(String value) { someString=value; }

Whether they are written in that order

public void setSomeString(String value) { someString=value; }
public String getSomeString() { return someString; }

or the opposite. Wouldn't they?

I would however suggest to stick to one order in your code. Less entropy is always better :)

Community · Accepted Answer · 2020-06-20 09:12:55Z

2

There is no difference.

According to the C# Language Specification http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms228593.aspx, 10.7.2 Accessors (page 324)

The accessor-declarations of a property specify the executable statements associated with reading and writing that property.

accessor-declarations:
get-accessor-declaration   set-accessor-declaration
set-accessor-declaration   get-accessor-declaration

As shown it states either order has the same effect

edited Jun 20, 2020 at 9:12

CommunityBot

11 silver badge

answered Oct 14, 2013 at 12:14

Adam Marshall

3,0299 gold badges48 silver badges83 bronze badges

Comments

Nikhil Agrawal · Accepted Answer · 2013-11-04 00:28:58Z

2

Internally Get and Set are methods like this

private PropertyType Get() {}
private Set(value as PropertyType) {}

Since order of declaration of methods is not important, same case goes here.

MSDN:

The body of the get accessor is similar to that of a method. It must return a value of the property type.

The set accessor is similar to a method that returns void. It uses an implicit parameter called value, whose type is the type of the property.

edited Nov 4, 2013 at 0:28

answered Oct 14, 2013 at 12:46

Nikhil Agrawal

48.8k25 gold badges134 silver badges212 bronze badges

Comments

walther · Accepted Answer · 2013-10-14 11:37:51Z

1

{ get; set; } is just a shortcut so you don't have to write getters and setters for every field you want to expose. It's the same as when you write

public string GetSomeString() { }
public void SetSomeString(string value) { }

Does it matter, which one you write first? Of course not.

answered Oct 14, 2013 at 11:37

walther

13.6k5 gold badges44 silver badges67 bronze badges

Comments

Salah Akbari · Accepted Answer · 2020-10-15 10:29:14Z

1

Just a convention you can use any of these when defining parameters:

public string SomeString { get; set; }
public string SomeString2 { set; get; }
    
public string someString2;

public string SomeString21
{
    get { return someString2; }
    set { someString2 = value; }
}

public string SomeString22
{
    set { someString2 = value; }
    get { return someString2; }
}

public string SomeString23
{
    set { someString2 = value; }
}

public string SomeString24
{
    get { return someString2; }
}

edited Oct 15, 2020 at 10:29

Salah Akbari

40k10 gold badges85 silver badges115 bronze badges

answered Oct 14, 2013 at 11:49

Tafari

3,1294 gold badges23 silver badges29 bronze badges

Comments

Salah Akbari · Accepted Answer · 2020-10-07 05:13:15Z

As others have already pointed out, there is no difference and it is just a convention. But to prove that up, you can see how compiler actually treats your code, given the following:

public class C 
{
    public string SomeString { get; set;}
    public string SomeString2 { set; get; }
}

This will be treated as:

public class C
{
    [CompilerGenerated]
    [DebuggerBrowsable(DebuggerBrowsableState.Never)]
    private string <SomeString>k__BackingField;

    [CompilerGenerated]
    [DebuggerBrowsable(DebuggerBrowsableState.Never)]
    private string <SomeString2>k__BackingField;

    public string SomeString
    {
        [CompilerGenerated]
        get
        {
            return <SomeString>k__BackingField;
        }
        [CompilerGenerated]
        set
        {
            <SomeString>k__BackingField = value;
        }
    }

    public string SomeString2
    {
        [CompilerGenerated]
        get
        {
            return <SomeString2>k__BackingField;
        }
        [CompilerGenerated]
        set
        {
            <SomeString2>k__BackingField = value;
        }
    }
}

As you can see, in both of them a new BackingField is generated by compiler and the body of two properties are same exactly.

The reference.

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Using {set; get;} instead of {get; set;}

7 Answers 7

3 Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

7 Answers 7

3 Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Comments

Related