C# property setter

[cosmo]

When doing a property implementation for an attribute in C#, the operation signature isn't what I expected (? correct ?).  Perhaps this is just an issue with not understanding how to make the tool do what I want.

For example, the attribute '- _Foo : decimal', might need to be associated with a setter property '+ Foo (decimal) : void'.  Despite unchecking the 'read' checkbox and only leaving the 'write' checkbox checked, only the signature for the getter was created.  Why didn't it create a signature that reflects an assignment instead of a value fetch?  Also in those cases where the property is read/write, why aren't both get and set signatures present?

[Eve]

It all looks okay to me.

Code: [Select]

     private decimal _ReadWrite;
      private decimal _ReadOnly;
      private decimal _WriteOnly;
      
      public decimal ReadWrite{
            get{
                  return _ReadWrite;
            }
            set{
                  _ReadWrite = value;
            }
      }

      public decimal ReadOnly{
            get{
                  return _ReadOnly;
            }
      }

      public decimal WriteOnly{
            set{
                  _WriteOnly = value;
            }
      }
The fact that you're getting a parameter and return type suggests that something is causing EA to think it's not generating C#.  So I'd check you class language and that the C# radio button is selected in the properties dialog.

[cosmo]

Hey Simon, thnx for the quick response.  I guess I should have clarified that my question was more on EA's UML class diagram than it was on the generated code.  But that certainly answered the other question that I didn't ask.  Very cool!

But when using the UML class diagram to convey some of the underlying model to other developers/companies, the getter signature displayed in the UML class diagram isn't clear that one should implement just a getter, or a setter, or both.

I like using the property checkbox from the attribute popup, but if the class diagram doesn't show the setter signature, then I'm left wondering if this is a UML 2.1 limitation, a tool limitation, or a spot where I should not use the tool feature and come up with my own stereotypes (where the operation signature is to be ignored because of a 'perceived' tool limitation).

[Eve]

Well, on the UML diagram EA shows the stereotype (which specifies that it is a property) and the parameter type shows the type of the property.

What it doesn't show (but the code generation uses) is the tagged values on the operation.