Home/ Questions/Q 6713069
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-26T08:20:08+00:00

In a recent project – i’ve hit an unexpected snag. A class with simple

  • 0

In a recent project – i’ve hit an unexpected snag.
A class with simple public fields (note not properties) doesn’t seem to want to play nice with the
ASP.net MVC 3.0 model binder.

Is this by design?

besides changing the fields to properties – any options here?

update

The reason for the simple fields (instead of properties) is because I’m working with a shared library between MVC and a Script Sharp project. Script sharp supports properties – but it becomes a mess with javascript in the view (using knockout.js)

So despite what i’d love (which is to just use properties) i’m using public fields in my dto classes.

I wanted to avoid having multiple definitions of the same classes. sigh

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    Is this by design?

    Yes, only properties with public getter/setters work with the default model binder.

    besides changing the fields to properties – any options here?

    That’s what you should do as you should be using view models anyway. And view models are specifically designed for the views. So changing the fields to properties is the correct way to do. Now if you don’t follow good practices and try to use your domain models as input/output to actions then you will have to write a custom model binder that works with fields. It will be a lot of work though.

    • 0