Using XML decorations to specify default values during de-serialization
XmlSerializer
does support [DefaultValue]
, but it uses it during serialization. During deserialization, it simply runs the constructor, then takes incoming values and applies them. A common approach, then, is to use the constructor (or field-initializers):
public Foo() {
Bar = 4;
}
[DefaultValue(4), XmlAttribute("bar")]
public int Bar {get;set;}
However; XmlSerializer
's interpretation of this is not "supply an empty element" - but rather "omit the element(/attribute)". Even int?
doesn't map to "empty". To handle empty elements, you would have to handle it as a string. Which is ugly.
Comments
-
CJM over 3 years
I have a problem deserializing some XML; the XML supplied by a third party is quite verbose, so if there is no value set for an particular element, it will supply and empty element (e.g.
<element1 />
).This is a problem for certain elements, for example, those that are meant to store integers. I have control over the third party, so I could either get them to specify a default value (
<myinteger>0</myinteger>
) or I can get them to omit these elements entirely. Both of these should avoid the problem.However, there may be situations in future, where we don't have so much control - in which case, is there a way of specifying, perhaps via a decoration, a default value?
[XmlElement("myinteger")=0???] public int MyInteger { get { return myInteger; } set { myInteger= value; } }
-
CJM almost 14 yearsHmmmm... simply getting the third party to omit empty elements of a description seems the easiest solution. I was just curious what I could do where I didn't have the luxury of that choice. I did consider the string option, but it is just an big can of worms...
-
Matthew Flaschen almost 12 yearsThere is at least one important effect during deserialization. If the element is empty, without DefaultValue there may be a parsing error. However, with it, the generated code will skip the empty element.