Re: Q: making 'bad' Constructors protected/private

From: Holger Hoffstätte (holge..izards.de)
Date: Sun Mar 02 2003 - 12:00:26 EST

  • Next message: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Modeler vs. consistency of DataMap/Entity/Attribute/Relationship"

    > I am confused, ObjectId doesn't have a default constructor.

    No, _I_ am confused! You are right. I thought that the default constructor
    would always be implicit, but it seems that's not the case when
    subclassing from Object (sigh). It's not a problem then.

    <crawling back under rock>

    > In case of DbAttribute, you can always call setName before adding to an
    > entity. We use it all over in the unit tests. I don't have any serious

    Well, you and I know that, but I'm regularly dealing with people who
    happily call everything that they can..in random order. :-/

    > objections to making it protected (but not private), I just don't see a
    > need to do so.

    It's not obvious from the API, that's all.

    Holger



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Mar 02 2003 - 12:03:41 EST