Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I always shy away from syntax sugars. If I like a private field with setter and getter I write it into my code. The most of the code is written by autocomplete and if I do now like to se it I just fold it away. I have control over the naming and I can set breakpoints into the getter/setter to trap all those case where I somehow write rubbish. I also have the benefit of seeing the field in my debugger and can access them for hydration without the setter. I see no real use in such new keywords. Just my 2 cents


> I can set breakpoints into the getter/setter

field doesn't stop this.

> I also have the benefit of seeing the field in my debugger

The debugger could still show it. The backing field is still there.


the text says the backing variable is hidden from debugger by attribut, isn't it?


That's why I wrote could. You can also use an IL postprocessor to get rid of the attribute.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: