Question

When writing a private method that has no need to access other members of the same class, how do you choose between private member and let binding?

I tend to use private members because it s easier to change accessibility if required, but are there other aspects to keep in mind when making the choice?
Are let bindings compiled as private members (making this only a style choice)?

Answer 1

光谱的相关部分是8.6.2 。它指出:

The compiled representation used for values declared in “let” bindings in classes is either:

A value that is local to the object constructor (if the value is not a syntactic function, is not mutable and is not used in any function or member).

An instance field in the corresponding CLI type (if the value is not a syntactic function, but is used in some function or member).

A member of the corresponding CLI type (if the value is a syntactic function).

此外:

Non-function let-bindings that are not used in either the members of a type or a function binding are optimized away and become values that are local to the resulting CLI constructor. Likewise, function bindings are represented as instance members.

我倾向于<代码>let,对私人会员具有约束力,因为它们具有更大的“功能”,即它们强调“什么”而不是“怎样” 汇编者关注最佳汇编形式。

Answer 2

。我想let和一份私人member之间的主要区别是:let bindings 不能上载,而是用name(<>/code>而不是this.Name(>)。因此,我认为,它基本上是一个排气的选择。

Answer 3

。例如:

type A() =
    let someUtil() = "util code"

    member private this.AnotherUtil() = "anotherUtil"

    member private this.DoSomething() =
       let anotherA = A()
       A.someUtil()  // compilation failed
       A.AnotherUtil() // ok

友情链接