Q: making 'bad' Constructors protected/private

From: Holger Hoffstätte (holge..izards.de)
Date: Sun Mar 02 2003 - 10:27:36 EST

Next message: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Q: making 'bad' Constructors protected/private"

Previous message: Holger Hoffstätte: "Modeler vs. consistency of DataMap/Entity/Attribute/Relationship"
Next in thread: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Q: making 'bad' Constructors protected/private"
Reply: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Q: making 'bad' Constructors protected/private"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Currently many classes offer public constructors, only to blow up later
when they are used. Obvious candidates are classes like e.g. ObjectId,
Attribute, Relationship etc. I think the default Constructor should be at
least protected, so that confusion is restricted to subclasses.
Good idea?

Holger

Next message: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Q: making 'bad' Constructors protected/private"
Previous message: Holger Hoffstätte: "Modeler vs. consistency of DataMap/Entity/Attribute/Relationship"
Next in thread: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Q: making 'bad' Constructors protected/private"
Reply: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: Q: making 'bad' Constructors protected/private"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Mar 02 2003 - 10:30:34 EST