为什么编译器会发生这种情况 [英] Why does the compiler let this happen
问题描述
为什么编译器不会在这样的代码块上抛出错误：
public string Email
{
get
{
返回电子邮件;
}
}
我无法想象任何时候递归会在一个属性中有用
getter而且这是我不可避免地输入的东西。
Why doesn''t the compiler throw an error on a block of code like this:
public string Email
{
get
{
return Email;
}
}
I can''t think of any time where recursion would be useful in a property
getter and it is something that I have accidently typed more than once.
推荐答案
我想不排除你*可能*有某种奇怪的代码，你设置一些变量，然后希望递归地
调用该属性。一个属性get，实际上只是一个方法包装器，在
之后，所以可以想象。
现在，实际上，没有人真正需要一个递归属性，
，因为它通常只是检索私有存储的值。但是，
编译器没有做出任何假设。
" Scott Simons" < Scott.Simons.At.MealMagic.Com.Remove.This>在留言中写道
新闻：D2 ********************************** @ microsof t.com ...
I guess it doesn''t rule out the fact that you *could* have some sort of
weird code where you are setting some variable and then wish to recursively
call the property. A property get, is really just a method wrapper, after
all, so it is conceivable.
Now, in practical terms, no one should really need a recursive property,
since typically it just retrieves a value stored privately. However, the
compiler doesn''t make any assumptions.
"Scott Simons" <Scott.Simons.At.MealMagic.Com.Remove.This> wrote in message
news:D2**********************************@microsof t.com...
为什么编译器不会在这样的代码块上抛出错误：
public string Email
{
获取
{
返回电子邮件;
}
}
我无法想到任何时候递归在属性中有用
getter，这是我不经意间输入的东西。
Why doesn''t the compiler throw an error on a block of code like this:
public string Email
{
get
{
return Email;
}
}
I can''t think of any time where recursion would be useful in a property
getter and it is something that I have accidently typed more than once.
>公共字符串电子邮件
> public string Email
{
获取
{
返回电子邮件;
}
}
我可以'想想任何时候递归在一个属性
getter中是有用的，这是我不经意地输入的东西。
{
get
{
return Email;
}
}
I can''t think of any time where recursion would be useful in a property
getter and it is something that I have accidently typed more than once.
编译器允许这样做，因为对于物业获取者而言，它是完全合法的。
返回自己。你是对的，在一个吸气剂中很少使用递归，
但想象一下，如果编译器在你需要这个时不允许这个
会有多么令人厌恶可能性。
Anders Nor？s http://dotnetjunkies.com/weblog/anoras/
The compiler allows this because it is perfectly legal for a property getter
to return itself. You''re right that recursion is seldom used in a getter,
but imagine how irretating it would be if the compiler didn''t allow this
when you needed this possibility.
Anders Nor?s
http://dotnetjunkies.com/weblog/anoras/
由于获取和设置是一个循环，因此在循环中更好地处理和奇怪的代码
没有参数化？
" Marina"写道：
Wouldn''t and weird code be better handled in a loop since gets and sets are
not parameterized?
"Marina" wrote:
我想它并不排除你*可能*有某种奇怪的代码，你设置一些变量，然后希望递归地打电话给财产。
之后，属性get，实际上只是一个方法包装器。
现在，实际上，没有人真正需要递归属性，
因为它通常只是检索私下存储的值。但是，
编译器没有做出任何假设。
Scott Simons < Scott.Simons.At.MealMagic.Com.Remove.This>在消息中写道
新闻：D2 ********************************** @ microsof t.com。 ..
I guess it doesn''t rule out the fact that you *could* have some sort of
weird code where you are setting some variable and then wish to recursively
call the property. A property get, is really just a method wrapper, after
all, so it is conceivable.
Now, in practical terms, no one should really need a recursive property,
since typically it just retrieves a value stored privately. However, the
compiler doesn''t make any assumptions.
"Scott Simons" <Scott.Simons.At.MealMagic.Com.Remove.This> wrote in message
news:D2**********************************@microsof t.com...
为什么编译器不会在这样的代码块上抛出错误：
public string Email
{
get
{
返回电子邮件;
}
}
我无法想到任何时候递归会对房产有用
getter，这是我意外输入的内容。
Why doesn''t the compiler throw an error on a block of code like this:
public string Email
{
get
{
return Email;
}
}
I can''t think of any time where recursion would be useful in a property
getter and it is something that I have accidently typed more than once.
这篇关于为什么编译器会发生这种情况的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
