There is actually a (subtle) difference between the two. Imagine you have the following code in File1.cs:
// File1.cs
using System;
namespace Outer.Inner
{
class Foo
{
static void Bar()
{
double d = Math.PI;
}
}
}
Now imagine that someone adds another file (File2.cs) to the project that looks like this:
// File2.cs
namespace Outer
{
class Math
{
}
}
The compiler searches Outer
before looking at those using
directives outside the namespace, so it finds Outer.Math
instead of System.Math
. Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately?), Outer.Math
has no PI
member, so File1 is now broken.
This changes if you put the using
inside your namespace declaration, as follows:
// File1b.cs
namespace Outer.Inner
{
using System;
class Foo
{
static void Bar()
{
double d = Math.PI;
}
}
}
Now the compiler searches System
before searching Outer
, finds System.Math
, and all is well.
Some would argue that Math
might be a bad name for a user-defined class, since there's already one in System
; the point here is just that there is a difference, and it affects the maintainability of your code.
It's also interesting to note what happens if Foo
is in namespace Outer
, rather than Outer.Inner
. In that case, adding Outer.Math
in File2 breaks File1 regardless of where the using
goes. This implies that the compiler searches the innermost enclosing namespace before it looks at any using
directive.
Without using something like postsharp, the minimal version I use uses something like:
public class Data : INotifyPropertyChanged
{
// boiler-plate
public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged;
protected virtual void OnPropertyChanged(string propertyName)
{
PropertyChangedEventHandler handler = PropertyChanged;
if (handler != null) handler(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propertyName));
}
protected bool SetField<T>(ref T field, T value, string propertyName)
{
if (EqualityComparer<T>.Default.Equals(field, value)) return false;
field = value;
OnPropertyChanged(propertyName);
return true;
}
// props
private string name;
public string Name
{
get { return name; }
set { SetField(ref name, value, "Name"); }
}
}
Each property is then just something like:
private string name;
public string Name
{
get { return name; }
set { SetField(ref name, value, "Name"); }
}
which isn't huge; it can also be used as a base-class if you want. The bool
return from SetField
tells you if it was a no-op, in case you want to apply other logic.
or even easier with C# 5:
protected bool SetField<T>(ref T field, T value,
[CallerMemberName] string propertyName = null)
{...}
which can be called like this:
set { SetField(ref name, value); }
with which the compiler will add the "Name"
automatically.
C# 6.0 makes the implementation easier:
protected void OnPropertyChanged([CallerMemberName] string propertyName = null)
{
PropertyChanged?.Invoke(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propertyName));
}
...and now with C#7:
protected void OnPropertyChanged(string propertyName)
=> PropertyChanged?.Invoke(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propertyName));
protected bool SetField<T>(ref T field, T value,[CallerMemberName] string propertyName = null)
{
if (EqualityComparer<T>.Default.Equals(field, value)) return false;
field = value;
OnPropertyChanged(propertyName);
return true;
}
private string name;
public string Name
{
get => name;
set => SetField(ref name, value);
}
And, with C# 8 and Nullable reference types, it would look like this:
public event PropertyChangedEventHandler? PropertyChanged;
protected void OnPropertyChanged(string propertyName) => PropertyChanged?.Invoke(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propertyName));
protected bool SetField<T>(ref T field, T value, [CallerMemberName] string propertyName = "")
{
if (EqualityComparer<T>.Default.Equals(field, value)) return false;
field = value;
OnPropertyChanged(propertyName);
return true;
}
private string name;
public string Name
{
get => name;
set => SetField(ref name, value);
}
Best Answer
I just ran into the same issue.
Closing VS and deleting the relevant SUO file (in the folder of the solution, may be hidden) worked like a charm.