Best practices naming convention for const Enum avoiding circular definition

Question

This is sort of a duplicate question, but there was no real resolution.

So here we go. Lets say I have:

public enum Color
{
    Red,
    Blue,
    Green
}

public class BlueUnicorn
{
    private const Color Color = Color.Blue;
}

"Use a singular name for most Enum types, but use a plural name for Enum types that are bit fields." retreived from Microsoft's Enumeration Type Naming Guidelines Check!
"Consider giving a property the same name as its type." retreived from Microsoft's Names of Type Members Check!
I should be using a constant instead of readonly, according to Resharper Check!

But I get a compiler error. It's odd though, no intellisense on this. The evaluation of the constant value for 'BlueUnicorn.Color' involves a circular definition.

I feel like I'm in a convention crack here. What should the field be named according to best practices naming convention?

May I suggest renaming `Color` to `ColorChoice` for either the enum or the BlueUnicorn const? — Kane, Apr 03 '13 at 13:18
This is a bit off to the side -- Despite Resharper's advice, I would use readonly instead of const for any public that is not a natural constant. (like a day or something that _never_ changes). Reason: consts are copied and not referenced. So, if your code above is in ClassLibrary A, and exe B references A, and you build, the Color.Blue value is copied into exe B. That means that if you release a new version of the class lib that changes the const value to green, your exe will continue to use blue until you recompile it as well. — JMarsch, Apr 03 '13 at 13:22
(although I suppose that you could argue that Color.Blue for a BlueUnicorn _is_ a natural constant :P — JMarsch, Apr 03 '13 at 13:24

score 4 · Answer 1 · answered Apr 03 '13 at 13:19

4

You can name that field just the way you do. To resolve the compilation error, simply add the namespace of the enum in front of Color.Blue.

answered Apr 03 '13 at 13:19

Daniel Hilgarth

171,043
40
335
443

@Grant: Unfortunately, yes. But that actually is a bug, because it is *not* redundant. – Daniel Hilgarth Apr 03 '13 at 13:26

RB. · Answer 2 · 2013-04-03T13:29:45.427

You are not in a convention crack (great term by the way!). Convention (2) does not apply as that is for properties, not fields or constants. Therefore, you can call it something like UnicornColor.

As a side note, I appreciate that this is probably not your real code (unless you genuinely are writing a Unicorn simulator!), but it seems to me that having a BlueUnicorn class is not right. Having a class that is defined based on a particular constant within that class seems too specific - surely Color would be an attribute of a Unicorn class?

I've no idea if this applies to your real code, but it might be your design is a bit wrong anyway, and the question never arises?

Best practices naming convention for const Enum avoiding circular definition

2 Answers2