In C# I can have a base class with a property containing just a getter. Subclasses can then override the property and give it both a getter and a setter. This doesn't seem possible in VB.NET with properties since the property statement itself must describe whether it is ReadOnly or not.
In my example below, it doesn't let me make the ReadWriteChild compile. I guess I could make the parent Read/Write and then have the ReadOnlyChild's setter not do anything, but that seems sort of hacky. The best alternative seems to be abandoning properties in favor of getter/setting methods in this case.
Public MustInherit Class Parent
Public MustOverride ReadOnly Property Foo() As String
End Class
Public Class ReadOnlyChild
Inherits Parent
Public Overrides ReadOnly Property Foo() As String
Get
// Get the Property
End Get
End Property
End Class
Public Class ReadWriteChild
Inherits Parent
Public Overrides Property Foo() As String
Get
// Get the property.
End Get
Set(ByVal value As String)
// Set the property.
End Set
End Property
End Class
-
Might be a longshot ... given that my knowledge of VB.NET is minimal ...
In C# you can specify the visibility of a property accessor independently of the property:
public virtual string Name { get { ... } protected set { ... } }
In this example, child classes can access the settor, but other classes cannot.
Also note that overrides can have greater visibility than what they override - so you can do this:
public overide string Name { get { ... } public set { ... } }
Could you do something like this in VB.NET ?
-
Unfortunatly I haven't got visual studio on here so I can't confirm.
Have you looked at using Shadows, this is effectivly the same as saying "new" in C# property declaration.
-
Given what you're trying to accomplish, and with the sample code you posted, VB.NET will not let you do this.
Ordinarily, you can declare a property in VB.NET like so:
Public Class qwqwqw Public Property xyz() As String Get Return "" End Get Private Set(ByVal value As String) // End Set End Property End Class
Basically marking the overall property as public, but giving a more restrictive scope to the setter (or getter).
The main problem in your case is the MustInherit (i.e. abstract) base class. Since the property you're defining in there is marked as MustOverride, you can't provide a default implementation (i.e. it, too, is abstract), and this includes the "Get" and "Set" outlines, therefore, whichever "overall" scope you give to this abstract property declaration, VB.NET will force you to use this scope for both the getters and setters within derived classes.
Having the ReadOnly qualifier on the base class's property will force all derived classes and the implementations of this property to also be ReadOnly. Leaving off the ReadOnly qualifier still will not work, since whatever scope you give to the abstract property will be the scope you must apply to both the setters and getters within derived implementations.
For example:
Public MustInherit Class Parent Public MustOverride Property Foo() As String End Class Public Class ReadOnlyChild Inherits Parent Public Overrides Property Foo() As String Get // End Get Private Set(ByVal value As String) // End Set End Property End Class
(Note the Private scoping on the setter). This will not work as VB.NET is insisting that since you're overriding the base classes property, your entire property must have the same scope as the property you're overriding (in this case, public).
Attempting to make the base class's abstract property protected will not work either, since you would then be required to implement the property at the same level of scoping as it's declared in your base class (i.e. protected). Ordinarily, when not overriding a base class's abstract definition with a specific scoping level, you can give a getter or setter a more restrictive scoping level, but you can't give it a less restrictive scoping level.
Therefore:
Public MustInherit Class Parent Protected MustOverride Property Foo() As String End Class Public Class ReadOnlyChild Inherits Parent Protected Overrides Property Foo() As String Public Get // End Get Set(ByVal value As String) // End Set End Property End Class
(Note the public scoping on the getter). Doesn't work either due to the public scope being less restrictive than the overall property scope of protected, and moreover, not of the same scoping level as defined on the base class's abstract property declaration.
If the design of your classes is as you mention in your question, I personally, would go with a "java-style" getter and setter methods as they can then be declared separately with their own scoping levels.
-
Confirm that MrEdmuno is correct in that you can use Shadow, however it appears you can't directly shadow something that is marked MustInherit, so you need to inherit into a class (Parent 2) ... then into your readonly (actually thinking about it you probably don't need to use shadows if you inherit into a class)
I think my comment question still stands, why are you needing to do this ? If they are your own classes would you be better to modify those, or implement as a interface ?
Public MustInherit Class Parent Public MustOverride ReadOnly Property Foo() As String End Class Public Class ReadOnlyChild Inherits Parent Public Overrides ReadOnly Property Foo() As String Get 'Get the Property Return "Return" End Get End Property End Class Public Class Parent2 Inherits Parent Public Overrides ReadOnly Property Foo() As String Get Return "Return 2" End Get End Property End Class Public Class ReadWriteChild Inherits Parent2 Public Shadows Property Foo() As String Get '// Get the property. Return "2" End Get Set(ByVal value As String) '** Set something End Set End Property
-
To address what Bevan suggested, in VB.NET you can declare a property as having a public getter and a protected setter, as follows:
Private _ExpectedTotalRoyalties As Decimal Public Property ExpectedTotalRoyalties() As Decimal Get Return _ExpectedTotalRoyalties End Get Protected Set(ByVal value As Decimal) If Not _ExpectedTotalRoyalties.Equals(value) Then _ExpectedTotalRoyalties = value SendPropertyChanged("ExpectedTotalRoyalties") End If End Set End Property
-
Do not try to override the property since it is not virtual. Override the OnReadOnlyChanged methods and handle your business there. Good luck
0 comments:
Post a Comment