c# marking class property as dirty

Question

The following is a simple example of an enum which defines the state of an object and a class which shows the implementation of this enum.

public enum StatusEnum
{
    Clean = 0,
    Dirty = 1,
    New = 2,
    Deleted = 3,
    Purged = 4
}


public class Example_Class
{
    private StatusEnum _Status = StatusEnum.New;

    private long _ID;
    private string _Name;

    public StatusEnum Status
    {
        get { return _Status; }
        set { _Status = value; }
    }

    public long ID
    {
        get { return _ID; }
        set { _ID = value; }
    }

    public string Name
    {
        get { return _Name; }
        set { _Name = value; }
    }
}

when populating the class object with data from the database, we set the enum value to "clean". with the goal of keeping most of the logic out of the presentation layer, how can we set the enum value to "dirty" when a property is changed.

i was thinking something along the lines of;

public string Name
{
    get { return _Name; }
    set 
    {
        if (value != _Name)
        {
               _Name = value; 
           _Status = StatusEnum.Dirty;
        }
    }   
}

in the setter of each property of the class.

does this sound like a good idea, does anyone have any better ideas on how the dirty flag can be assigned without doing so in the presentation layer.

Answer 1

This method is based on a set of different concepts provided in this thread. I thought i'd put it out there for anyone that is looking for a way to do this cleanly and efficiently, as i was myself.

The key of this hybrid concept is that:

1. You don't want to duplicate the data to avoid bloating and resource hogging;
2. You want to know when the object's properties have changed from a given original/clean state;
3. You want to have the IsDirty flag be both accurate, and require little processing time/power to return the value; and
4. You want to be able to tell the object when to consider itself clean again. This is especially useful when building/working within the UI.

Given those requirements, this is what i came up with, and it seems to be working perfectly for me, and has become very useful when working against UIs and capturing user changes accurately. I have also posted an "How to use" below to show you how I use this in the UI.

The Object

public class MySmartObject
{
    public string Name { get; set; }
    public int Number { get; set; }
    private int clean_hashcode { get; set; }
    public bool IsDirty { get { return !(this.clean_hashcode == this.GetHashCode()); } }

    public MySmartObject()
    {
        this.Name = "";
        this.Number = -1;
        MakeMeClean();

    }

    public MySmartObject(string name, int number)
    {
        this.Name = name;
        this.Number = number;
        MakeMeClean();
    }

    public void MakeMeClean()
    {
        this.clean_hashcode = this.Name.GetHashCode() ^ this.Number.GetHashCode();
    }

    public override int GetHashCode()
    {
        return this.Name.GetHashCode() ^ this.Number.GetHashCode();
    }
}

It's simple enough and addresses all of our requirements:

1. The data is NOT duplicated for the dirty check...
2. This takes into account all property changes scenarios (see scenarios below)...
3. When you call the IsDirty property, a very simple and small Equals operation is performed and it is fully customizable via the GetHashCode override...
4. By calling the MakeMeClean method, you now have a clean object again!

Of course you can adapt this to encompass a bunch of different states... it's really up to you. This example only shows how to have a proper IsDirty flag operation.

Scenarios
Let's go over some scenarios for this and see what comes back:

• Scenario 1
  New object is created using empty constructor,
  Property Name changes from "" to "James",
  call to IsDirty returns True! Accurate.

• Scenario 2
  New object is created using paramters of "John" and 12345,
  Property Name changes from "John" to "James",
  Property Name changes back from "James" to "John",
  Call to IsDirty returns False. Accurate, and we didn't have to duplicate the data to do it either!

How to use, a WinForms UI example
_{This is only an example, you can use this in many different ways from a UI.}

Let's say you have a two forms ([A] and [B]).

The first([A]) is your main form, and the second([B]) is a form that allows the user to change the values within the MySmartObject.

Both the [A] and the [B] form have the following property declared:

public MySmartObject UserKey { get; set; }

When the user clicks a button on the [A] form, an instance of the [B] form is created, its property is set and it is displayed as a dialog.

After form [B] returns, the [A] form updates its property based on the [B] form's IsDirty check. Like this:

private void btn_Expand_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
    SmartForm form = new SmartForm();
    form.UserKey = this.UserKey;
    if(form.ShowDialog() == DialogResult.OK && form.UserKey.IsDirty)
    {
        this.UserKey = form.UserKey;
        //now that we have saved the "new" version, mark it as clean!
        this.UserKey.MakeMeClean();
    }
}

Also, in [B], when it is closing, you can check and prompt the user if they are closing the form with unsaved changes in it, like so:

    private void BForm_FormClosing(object sender, FormClosingEventArgs e)
    {
        //If the user is closing the form via another means than the OK button, or the Cancel button (e.g.: Top-Right-X, Alt+F4, etc).
        if (this.DialogResult != DialogResult.OK && this.DialogResult != DialogResult.Ignore)
        {
            //check if dirty first... 
            if (this.UserKey.IsDirty)
            {
                if (MessageBox.Show("You have unsaved changes. Close and lose changes?", "Unsaved Changes", MessageBoxButtons.YesNo, MessageBoxIcon.Warning) == DialogResult.No)
                    e.Cancel = true;
            }

        }

    }

As you can see from the examples above, this can be a very useful thing to have since it really streamlines the UI.

Caveats

• Every time you implement this, you have to customize it to the object you're using. E.g.: there's no "easy" generic way of doing this without using reflection... and if you use reflection, you lose efficiency, especially in large and complex objects.

Hopefully this helps someone.

Answer 2

Here is how i do it.

In cases where i do not need to test for specific fields being dirty, I have an abstract class:

public abstract class SmartWrap : ISmartWrap
{
    private int orig_hashcode { get; set; }
    private bool _isInterimDirty;

    public bool IsDirty
    {
        get { return !(this.orig_hashcode == this.GetClassHashCode()); }
        set
        {
            if (value)
                this.orig_hashcode = this.orig_hashcode ^ 108.GetHashCode();
            else
                MakeClean();
        }
    }

    public void MakeClean()
    {
        this.orig_hashcode = GetClassHashCode();
        this._isInterimDirty = false;
    }

    // must be overridden to return combined hashcodes of fields testing for
    // example Field1.GetHashCode() ^ Field2.GetHashCode() 
    protected abstract int GetClassHashCode();

    public bool IsInterimDirty
    {
        get { return _isInterimDirty; }
    }

    public void SetIterimDirtyState()
    {
        _isInterimDirty = this.IsDirty;
    }

    public void MakeCleanIfInterimClean()
    {
        if (!IsInterimDirty)
            MakeClean();
    }

    /// <summary>
    /// Must be overridden with whatever valid tests are needed to make sure required field values are present.
    /// </summary>
    public abstract bool IsValid { get; }
}

}

As well as an interface

public interface ISmartWrap
{
    bool IsDirty { get; set; }
    void MakeClean();
    bool IsInterimDirty { get;  }
    void SetIterimDirtyState();
    void MakeCleanIfInterimClean();
}

This allows me to do partial saves, and preserve the IsDirty state if there is other details to save. Not perfect, but covers a lot of ground.

Example of usage with interim IsDirty State (Error wrapping and validation removed for clarity):

            area.SetIterimDirtyState();

            if (!UpdateClaimAndStatus(area))
                return false;

            area.MakeCleanIfInterimClean();

            return true;

This is good for most scenarios, however for some classes i want to test for each field with a backing field of original data, and either return a list of changes or at least an enum of fields changed. With an enum of fields changed i can then push that up through a message chain for selective update of fields in remote caches.

Answer 3

One option is to change it on write; another is to keep a copy of all the original values and compute the dirtiness when anyone asks for it. That has the added benefit that you can tell exactly which fields have changed (and in what way) which means you can issue minimal update statements and make merge conflict resolution slightly easier.

You also get to put all the dirtiness-checking in one place, so it doesn't pollute the rest of your code.

I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's an option worth considering.

Answer 4

Your approach is basically how I would do it. I would just remove the setter for the Status property:

public StatusEnum Status
{
    get { return _Status; }
    // set { _Status = value; }
}

and instead add a function

public SetStatusClean()
{
    _Status = StatusEnum.Clean;
}

As well as SetStatusDeleted() and SetStatusPurged(), because I find it better indicates the intention.

Edit

Having read the answer by Jon Skeet, I need to reconsider my approach ;-) For simple objects I would stick with my way, but if it gets more complex, his proposal would lead to much better organised code.

Answer 5

If your Example_Class is lightweight, consider storing the original state and then comparing the current state to the original in order to determine the changes. If not your approach is the best because stroing the original state consumes a lot of system resources in this case.

Answer 6

When you really do want a dirty flag at the class level (or, for that matter, notifications) - you can use tricks like below to minimise the clutter in your properties (here showing both IsDirty and PropertyChanged, just for fun).

Obviously it is a trivial matter to use the enum approach (the only reason I didn't was to keep the example simple):

class SomeType : INotifyPropertyChanged {
    private int foo;
    public int Foo {
        get { return foo; }
        set { SetField(ref foo, value, "Foo"); }
    }

    private string bar;
    public string Bar {
        get { return bar; }
        set { SetField(ref bar, value, "Bar"); }
    }

    public bool IsDirty { get; private set; }
    public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged;
    protected void SetField<T>(ref T field, T value, string propertyName) {
        if (!EqualityComparer<T>.Default.Equals(field, value)) {
            field = value;
            IsDirty = true;
            OnPropertyChanged(propertyName);
        }
    }
    protected virtual void OnPropertyChanged(string propertyName) {
        var handler = PropertyChanged;
        if (handler != null) {
            handler(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propertyName));
        }
    }
}

You might also choose to push some of that into an abstract base class, but that is a separate discussion

Answer 7

Another method is to override the GetHashCode() method to somthing like this:

public override int GetHashCode() // or call it GetChangeHash or somthing if you dont want to override the GetHashCode function...
{
    var sb = new System.Text.StringBuilder();

    sb.Append(_dateOfBirth);
    sb.Append(_marital);
    sb.Append(_gender);
    sb.Append(_notes);
    sb.Append(_firstName);
    sb.Append(_lastName);  

    return sb.ToString.GetHashCode();
}

Once loaded from the database, get the hash code of the object. Then just before you save check if the current hash code is equal to the previous hash code. if they are the same, don't save.

Edit:

As people have pointed out this causes the hash code to change - as i use Guids to identify my objects, i don't mind if the hashcode changes.

Edit2:

Since people are adverse to changing the hash code, instead of overriding the GetHashCode method, just call the method something else. The point is detecting a change not whether i use guids or hashcodes for object identification.

Answer 8

If you want to implement it in this way, and you want to reduce the amount of code, you might consider applying Aspect Oriented Programming.

You can for instance use a compile-time weaver like PostSharp , and create an 'aspect' that can be applied to properties. This aspect then makes sure that your dirty flag is set when appropriate.

The aspect can look like this:

[Serializable]
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property)]
public class ChangeTrackingAttribute : OnMethodInvocationAspect
{
    public override void OnInvocation( MethodInvocationEventArgs e )
    {
        if( e.Delegate.Method.ReturnParameter.ParameterType == typeof(void) )
        {
              // we're in the setter
              IChangeTrackable target = e.Delegate.Target as IChangeTrackable;

              // Implement some logic to retrieve the current value of 
              // the property
              if( currentValue != e.GetArgumentArray()[0] )
              {
                  target.Status = Status.Dirty;
              }
              base.OnInvocation (e);
        } 
    }  
} 

Offcourse, this means that the classes for which you want to implement ChangeTracking, should implement the IChangeTrackable interface (custom interface), which has at least the 'Status' property.

You can also create a custom attribute ChangeTrackingProperty, and make sure that the aspect that has been created above, is only applied to properties that are decorated with this ChangeTrackingProperty attribute.

For instance:

public class Customer : IChangeTrackable
{
    public DirtyState Status
    {
        get; set;
    }

    [ChangeTrackingProperty]
    public string Name
    { get; set; }
}

This is a little bit how I see it. You can even make sure that PostSharp checks at compile-time whether classes that have properties that are decorated with the ChangeTrackingProperty attribute, implement the IChangeTrackable interface.

Answer 9

Take a look at PostSharp (http://www.postsharp.org/). You can easily create a Attribute which marks it as dirty you can add the attrubute to each property that needs it and it keeps all your code in one place.

Roughly speaking Create an interface which has your status in make the class implement it. Create an attribute which can be applied on properties and cast to your interface in order to set the value when something changes one of the marked properties.

Answer 10

Apart from the advice of 'consider making your type immutable', here's something I wrote up (and got Jon and Marc to teach me something along the way)

public class Example_Class
{    // snip
     // all properties are public get and private set

     private Dictionary<string, Delegate> m_PropertySetterMap;

     public Example_Class()
     {
        m_PropertySetterMap = new Dictionary<string, Delegate>();
        InitializeSettableProperties();
     }
     public Example_Class(long id, string name):this()
     {   this.ID = id;    this.Name = name;   }

     private void InitializeSettableProperties()
     {
        AddToPropertyMap<long>("ID",  value => { this.ID = value; });
        AddToPropertyMap<string>("Name", value => { this.Name = value; }); 
     }
     // jump thru a hoop because it won't let me cast an anonymous method to an Action<T>/Delegate
     private void AddToPropertyMap<T>(string sPropertyName, Action<T> setterAction)
     {   m_PropertySetterMap.Add(sPropertyName, setterAction);            }

     public void SetProperty<T>(string propertyName, T value)
     {
        (m_PropertySetterMap[propertyName] as Action<T>).Invoke(value);
        this.Status = StatusEnum.Dirty;
     }
  }

You get the idea.. possible improvements: Use constants for PropertyNames & check if property has really changed. One drawback here is that

obj.SetProperty("ID", 700);         // will blow up int instead of long
obj.SetProperty<long>("ID", 700);   // be explicit or use 700L

Answer 11

You could also think about boxing your variables, which comes at a performance cost, but also has its merits. It is pretty consise and you cannot accidentally change a value without setting your dirty status.

public class Variable<T>
{
    private T _value;
    private readonly Action<T> _onValueChangedCallback;

    public Variable(Action<T> onValueChangedCallback, T value = default)
    {
        _value = value;
        _onValueChangedCallback = onValueChangedCallback;
    }

    public void SetValue(T value)
    {
        if (!EqualityComparer<T>.Default.Equals(_value, value))
        {
            _value = value;
            _onValueChangedCallback?.Invoke(value);
        }
    }

    public T GetValue()
    {
        return _value;
    }

    public static implicit operator T(Variable<T> variable)
    {
        return variable.GetValue();
    }
}

and then hook in a callback that marks your class as dirty.

public class Example_Class
{
    private StatusEnum _Status = StatusEnum.New;

    private Variable<long> _ID;
    private Variable<string> _Name;

    public StatusEnum Status
    {
        get { return _Status; }
        set { _Status = value; }
    }

    public long ID => _ID;
    public string Name => _Name;

    public Example_Class()
    {
         _ID = new Variable<long>(l => Status = StatusEnum.Dirty);
         _Name = new Variable<string>(s => Status = StatusEnum.Dirty);
    }
}