c# - Bindable field in ViewModel -

this question has answer here:

• implementing inotifypropertychanged - better way exist? 31 answers

in viewmodels there typically lots of these

private string somefield; public string somefield {          {         return somefield;        }     set     {         somefield = value;         notifyofpropertychanged(() => somefield);     } } 

is there way short version of such construct, bindable?

so have write like:

public bindable<string> somefield; 

perhaps action shall fired notifypropertychanged...

i suppose create own class maintains value , raises inotifypropertychanged against containing class create like:

public bindable<string> somefield = new bindable<string>("test", this); 

and binding against somefield access contained value , setting lead inotifypropertychanged being raised against this

you'd need use implicit cast operators in order binding system see bindable<t> source of t , place put t

see: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/85w54y0a.aspx

something along lines of following may suffice:

public class bindable<t> {     private t _value;     private propertychangedeventhandler _notifyhandler;     private inotifypropertychanged _notifytarget;     private string _name;      public bindable(propertychangedeventhandler notifyhandler, inotifypropertychanged notifytarget, string name, t value = default(t), bool trigger = false)     {         _value = value;         _name = name;         _notifyhandler = notifyhandler;         _notifytarget = notifytarget;          if (trigger)         {             _notifyhandler(_notifytarget, new propertychangedeventargs(_name));         }     }      public implicit operator t(bindable<t> bindable)     {         return bindable._value;     }      public implicit operator bindable<t>(t value)     {         return new bindable<t>(_notifyhandler, _notifytarget, _name, value, true);     } } 

the above code crude , better version no doubt created, should point in direction need go.

---

on further investigation of proposed solution i've found problematic work owing implicit cast t bindable<t> in order remember target , other details, i'm sure sort of solution contains enough ideas lead working one.