property serialisation get and set

[gary]

Hi,

When I serialise a class to XML which has properties I sometimes have
properties that are like this -

public double SpeedMPH {
get {
return (double)Math.Round(windSpeed*2.23693629,2);
}
}

There is no set accessor for it but one must exist for serialisation to
occur. So I normally end writing a set that has something in it like

public double SpeedMPH {
get {
return (double)Math.Round(windSpeed*2.23693629,2);
}
set { int p=0xf; }
}

This is obviously not best practice, what is the solution?

[Paul Hatcher]

You could put an XmlIgnore attribute on it as it's not part of the
persistent state of the model but derived.

Paul

"gary" <gb*****@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11*********************@g44g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...

Hi,

When I serialise a class to XML which has properties I sometimes have
properties that are like this -

public double SpeedMPH {
get {
return (double)Math.Round(windSpeed*2.23693629,2);
}
}

There is no set accessor for it but one must exist for serialisation to
occur. So I normally end writing a set that has something in it like

public double SpeedMPH {
get {
return (double)Math.Round(windSpeed*2.23693629,2);
}
set { int p=0xf; }
}

This is obviously not best practice, what is the solution?

[Collin Bennett]

It depends on how much coding you want to do. If you like to code then
implement IXmlSerializable.

gary wrote:

Hi,

When I serialise a class to XML which has properties I sometimes have
properties that are like this -

public double SpeedMPH {
get {
return (double)Math.Round(windSpeed*2.23693629,2);
}
}

There is no set accessor for it but one must exist for serialisation to
occur. So I normally end writing a set that has something in it like

public double SpeedMPH {
get {
return (double)Math.Round(windSpeed*2.23693629,2);
}
set { int p=0xf; }
}

This is obviously not best practice, what is the solution?