CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c#propertiesdefinition
Andrius Naruševičius
Andrius Naruševičius

Reputation: 8578

Difference between property defining (with and without {get; set;})

I have this

public int CityId { get; set; }

and

public int CityId;

If I use first - it works in EF code first while the second - doesn't. But if I definte {get; set;} and do nothing else, what is the exact difference between a simple definition? I understand that I can add some additional/customized code to {get; set;} layout, but doesn't it work exactly the same if without {get; set;}?

Upvotes: 1

Views: 549

Answers (3)

WhileTrueSleep
WhileTrueSleep

Reputation: 1534

The difference you are looking for is called encapsulation.

example

In your example is not a big difference between the field and the property. The field got a better performance than the property because it doesn't need to call a method to access it. Anyway the disadvantages of a field is that everyone can access it and you (the class holding the field) don't have any control about it.

Upvotes: 1

Kenneth
Kenneth

Reputation: 28737

With this syntax:

public int CityId { get; set; }

you're actually creating an auto-implemented property and behind the scenes it gets translated to this:

private int _CityId;
public int CityId { 
    get
    {
        return _CityId;
    } 
    set
    {
        _CityId = value;
    }
}

This syntax:

public int CityId;

is just a field

Upvotes: 2

cdhowie
cdhowie

Reputation: 168948

public int CityId;

This is a field.

public int CityId { get; set; }

This is a property, and the compiler will generate a private field for you automatically to back the property.

They are two different things. A property provides a getter, a setter, or both. The "get" and "set" operations on properties are compiled as method calls.

A field is just an exposed variable. It is generally considered bad practice for fields to be public.

Upvotes: 2

Related Questions