wrote:

> I'm using a class in my project and I'd like to determine if the any o=

> the fields in the object have been modified since the original =

> instantiation. For intent and purposes, the following class is typica=

> public class patient
> {
> private string name;
> private string surname;
>
> private bool dirty;
>
> public Name {
> get { return this.name; }
> set { this.name =3D value; dirty =3D true; }
> }
> public Surname {
> get { return this.surname; }
> set { this.surname =3D value; dirty =3D true}
> }
> public Dirty {
> get { return dirty; }
> }
> }

Peter Duniho wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 09:56:39 -0700, Jamie Risk <risk.#.@intectus.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm using a class in my project and I'd like to determine if the any
>> of the fields in the object have been modified since the original
>> instantiation. For intent and purposes, the following class is typical:
>
> I'm not sure what "best practices" has to do with anything here. There
> are a variety of mechanisms by which the information you seek could be
> obtained, but what's the "best" way surely depends on how you want it to
> work, and what sort of access you have to the classes.
>
> Assuming that semantically what you want to know is whether a mutable
> class is "dirty" (that is, has been instantiated with some specific
> values, at least one of which has subsequently been changed), I would
> just include a boolean flag in the class to indicate that state. In any
> of your properties, have the setter also set the flag to true. Then you
> could have a read-only property that retrieves the flag.
>
> For example:
>
>> public class patient
>> {
>> private string name;
>> private string surname;
>>
>> private bool dirty;
>>
>> public Name {
>> get { return this.name; }
>> set { this.name = value; dirty = true; }
>> }
>> public Surname {
>> get { return this.surname; }
>> set { this.surname = value; dirty = true}
>> }
>> public Dirty {
>> get { return dirty; }
>> }
>> }
>
> However, obviously you could accomplish this in a variety of other
> ways. For example, make the object cloneable and equatable, and then
> create a clone immediately after instantiation which you can then later
> compare for equality. Or you could create an event (per-instance) or
> events (per-property) that are raised whenever a property is modified;
> subscribing to those events would tell you as it happens whether changes
> have occurred. Or you could simply create a different data structure
> that has copies of the properties in question, which you then compare
> explicitly at a later point in time. Or, some mechanism I haven't
> listed yet could be used instead of any of these.
>
> Any or all of these are appropriate, depending on your needs and what
> the current architecture allows.
>