Is this C# Console code correct?

Question

I am admittedly inexperienced with C#/OOP, but I recently came across this code and it feels incorrect to me even though it does appear to functionally work. The code is from a console application.

namespace ConsoleApp
{
  class Program
  {
    static private double Theta{ get; set; }

    static void Main(string[] args)
    {
      ...
      var thetaString = Console.ReadLine();
      if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(thetaString))
        Theta = Math.PI * Double.Parse(thetaString) / 180.0;
      ...
    }
  }
}

If I remove the static declaration from Theta, it will no longer compile. If I remove the {get; set}, it functions just as it did previously. What is this code doing? What is the significance of the accessors?

Does it work as expected? If so - it's correct, otherwise it's not. — zerkms, Mar 02 '15 at 21:16
Why do you feel that this is incorrect? What do you think that it *should* be? — Servy, Mar 02 '15 at 21:16
static functions cannot access instance variables, properities etc. — adt, Mar 02 '15 at 21:16
`Theta` is an [auto property](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb384054.aspx). — chris, Mar 02 '15 at 21:16
A static method cannot access instance members (unless of course it has an instance from which to reference the members). That is why you can't remove `static` from the Theta declaration. Without the accessors, you are defining a field, which is a storage location. With the accessors, you are defining a property, which is one or two methods that modify a storage location. The general preference is for properties, though the reasons for that are mostly significant for instance properties rather than static properties. — phoog, Mar 02 '15 at 21:17

score 1 · Accepted Answer · edited May 23 '17 at 12:28

If I remove the static declaration from Theta, it will no longer compile

That is because you're trying to access an instance property from a static method. You would need to create an instance of Program to access a non-static property.

What is the significance of the accessors?

They allow you do define methods that get/set values rather than just a field that stores a value. There are other more subtle differences, most of which are described here. In my option the most significant are:

Changing a field to a property is a breaking change - clients must be rebuilt against the new assembly to incorporate the change. Changing an auto-implemented property to one that has actual code is not a breaking change.
Most databinding methods use reflection and only support binding to properties.

Is this C# Console code correct?

1 Answers1