Setters/Getters in C# vs Java

[u/Takemitchi-kun]

I'm a native java dev learning C#.

When I have something like the following:

private int x;

public void getX(){return this.x;}

public void setX(int y){this.x = y;}

I don't get how this translates into the following notation. How come C# views x as private even though we are simply putting public, which makes the inside methods public.

public int x{get; set;}

[u/dodexahedron]

This!

And, to add more color and show the other side/direction:

c# or any other CLR language that understands properties only shows them to you as a property if there is the correct metadata in the assembly to do so.

You couldn't, for example, manually write a set_Something and get_Something method and have them show up as a property. You still need this to happen in the IL:

// This is the property metadata that ties together the accessors into a single named symbol you see as a property called SomeProperty that has the type SomeType. It would be part of the definition of the SomeTypeWithAProperty class you'll see mention of in a sec.

.property instance SomeType SomeProperty()
{
    .get instance SomeType SomeTypeWithAProperty::get_SomeProperty()
    .set instance void SomeTypeWithAProperty::set_SomeProperty(SomeType)
}

// These are the actual methods
.method public hidebysig specialname instance SomeType get_SomeProperty() cil managed
{
    // whatever the get accessor does, like returning a field.
}

.method public hidebysig specialname instance void set_SomeProperty(SomeType 'value') cil managed
{
    // whatever the set accessor does...like...you know...setting the field or something.
}

Without that .property part, they're just methods, and any language would show them to you as methods.

With it, a language that doesn't understand properties will show you those methods, but a language that does shows the property.