Welcome to ShenZhenJia Knowledge Sharing Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
menu search
person
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

Categories

According to MSDN's design guide for constructors,

"If you don’t explicitly declare any constructors on a type, many languages (such as C#) will automatically add a public default constructor. (Abstract classes get a protected constructor.) Adding a parameterized constructor to a class prevents the compiler from adding the default constructor. This often causes accidental breaking changes."

Why not:

"If you don’t explicitly declare any default constructors on a type, many languages (such as C#) will automatically add a public default constructor. (Abstract classes get a protected constructor.)"

What is the reason behind this?

See Question&Answers more detail:os

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
thumb_up_alt 0 like thumb_down_alt 0 dislike
749 views
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

1 Answer

Because not all classes should be constructed parameterless.

Consider a class that is designed to implement the interface between your application and a file on disk. It would be very inconvenient having to handle the case where the object is constructed without specifying which file to manage.

As such, since the main point of creating a non-static class is that you want to create objects of it, you're spared having to add an empty parameterless constructor if that is all you want to have.

Once you start adding constructors at all, then the automagic is disabled and no default constructor will be provided.


与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
thumb_up_alt 0 like thumb_down_alt 0 dislike
Welcome to ShenZhenJia Knowledge Sharing Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
...