Shadow property accessors.

[GoogleCodeExporter]

mark.kharitonov@gmail.com
==============
Discussed here - 
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6063273/is-it-possible-to-deserialize-a-priva
te-property-using-protobuf-net-in-silverli

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mark.kha...@gmail.com on 24 May 2011 at 3:36

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Thank you very much for the prompt commit.

Do you plan to add the suppport for the shadow getter as well?

Original comment by mark.kha...@gmail.com on 24 May 2011 at 3:41

[GoogleCodeExporter]

It feels like a much less likely scenario. Do you have a genuine use-case for 
that one?

Original comment by marc.gravell on 24 May 2011 at 3:47

[GoogleCodeExporter]

r387

Original comment by marc.gravell on 24 May 2011 at 3:49

• Changed state: Fixed
• Added labels: Type-Enhancement
• Removed labels: Type-Defect

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Well, I have totally internal properties, exposing internal types. The 
serialization I am currently using (CSLA mobile serialization) allows for that. 
Using protobuf-net probably means I have to turn this types public, but I am 
not sure yet. Having shadow getters makes it easier to concentrate all the 
protobuf-net related changes in a separate file, being a part of the partial 
declaration.

Does it make more sense now?

Original comment by mark.kha...@gmail.com on 24 May 2011 at 3:55