Java - is it bad practice not to have a class constructor? -
i want make helper class deals formatting (i.e. has methods remove punctuation , convert between types, reformatting names etc.). doesn't seem need fields - purpose passed things convert , return them, reformatted. bad practice leave out constructor? if so, should constructor doing? looking @ this link , noticed class describes lacks constructor.
is bad practice leave out constructor?
yes - because unless specify any constructors, java compiler give constructor same visibility class itself.
assuming methods static - seems unless want polymorphism - should make class final
, give private
constructor, other developers don't accidentally create instance of class, when pointless. when thinking api, time can remove ability developers stupid, :)
so like:
public final class helpers { private helpers() { } public static string formatdate(date date) { // etc } }
note taking polymorphism out of equation, you're removing possibility of changing behaviour tests etc. may fine - i'm not believer in "no statics, ever" - it's worth considering.
Comments
Post a Comment