Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8283741
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 8, 20262026-06-08T10:50:58+00:00 2026-06-08T10:50:58+00:00

Since C# 3.0 there is the new syntax to autogenerate the instance variable from

  • 0

Since C# 3.0 there is the new syntax to autogenerate the instance variable from a propertie:

public string Foo { get; set; } 

But there is no way to access the underlying backing field. So I don’t really see the point of it because declaring the same instance variable would produce the same effect without the overhead of calling the “getter” and “setter”.

public string Foo;

Declaring the property like:

public string Foo { get; } 

or

public string Foo { set; } 

is totally useless since we are not able to write resp. read the content of the field.

Does someone have a good explanation for why in C# they have put all this effort to introduce this syntactic sugar?

EDIT: People seems to think that I am confusing field and properties so let me clarify what I have said.

If you are using a property with auto generate field:

public string Foo { get; set; } 

Then there is no point to it, since whenever you access the properties there is the overhead call to the get_Foo() “getter” every time you are accessing the properties and since your aren’t doing anything particular in the the “getter” there is not mush interest of creating this property. Creating the field would have been exactly the same and it is mush faster (optimization wise).

Thanks

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-08T10:50:59+00:00Added an answer on June 8, 2026 at 10:50 am

    By itself it’s pointless, but you can do things like this:

    public string Foo { private set; get; } 
    

    Which has a lot more value.

    Also properties and fields are not the same things.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

since Windows Vista there is an new Win32-API call CreateSymbolicLink to create a symbolic
There should be a glitch in my syntax, or something I haven't understood, but
Since there is no way to join tables using Google App Engine datastore, I
Since there are no C# source codes for Wait, Pulse, PulseAll methods. Does anyone
Since there is no way that you can make the flash object transparent, there
Since there is no type in ruby, how do Ruby programmers make sure a
Edit Since there were many downvotes and people who didn't understand what I'm asking
I am trying to avoid using Net::SSH::Perl library since there is some problems in
I keep coming back to this problem, since there doesn't seem to be a
So my issue is pretty straight forward, since there is seemingly no callback for

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.