Do write-only properties have practical applications?

My first reaction to this question was: "What about the java.util.Random#setSeed method?"

I think that write-only properties are useful in several scenarios. For example, when you don't want to expose the internal representation (encapsulation), while allowing to change the state of the object. java.util.Random is a very good example of such design.

Code Analysis (aka FxCop) does give you a diagnostic:

CA1044 : Microsoft.Design : Because property 'WeirdClass.Name' is write-only, either add a property getter with an accessibility that is greater than or equal to its setter or convert this property into a method.

I have code similar to the following in an XNA project. As you can see, Scale is write-only, it is useful and (reasonably) intuitive and a read property (get) would not make sense for it. Sure it could be replaced with a method, but I like the syntax.

public class MyGraphicalObject
{
    public double ScaleX { get; set; }
    public double ScaleY { get; set; }
    public double ScaleZ { get; set; }

    public double Scale { set { ScaleX = ScaleY = ScaleZ = value; } }

    // more...
}

Write-only properties are actually quite useful, and I use them frequently. It's all about encapsulation -- restricting access to an object's components. You often need to provide one or more components to a class that it needs to use internally, but there's no reason to make them accessible to other classes. Doing so just makes your class more confusing ("do I use this getter or this method?"), and more likely that your class can be tampered with or have its real purpose bypassed.

See "Why getter and setter methods are evil" for an interesting discussion of this. I'm not quite as hardcore about it as the writer of the article, but I think it's a good thing to think about. I typically do use setters but rarely use getters.