![]() P.name // error: variable name in class Person cannot be accessed in Person Basic Scala class examplesĬlass Person(var name: String, var age: Int)Ĭlass Person(val firstName: String, val lastName: String) Unlike the Cookbook, I don’t describe them much here, I just show the examples, mostly as a reference for myself (and anyone else that can benefit from them). I created most of these in the process of writing the Scala Cookbook. This post contains a collection of examples of Scala classes and class properties. show more info on classes/objects in repl.In my experience, default constructors tend to be the exception rather than the rule. ![]() Does the default constructor sufficiently guarantee the integrity of the encapsulated data? If so, the default constructor is appropriate, but otherwise it's not. In summary, a default constructor should be a signal to stop and think about the invariants of the class in question. If, on the other hand, the class implements an interface, it might be a sign that it actually represents pure behavior.Ī class that represents pure behavior by implementing an interface is not necessarily a bad thing.If such a class can be turned into a static class it's a certain sign of Feature Envy.This may be a symptom of the Feature Envy code smell, which is often evidenced by the class in question being a concrete class. If a class contains no data obviously there is no data to protect. You may agree or disagree with this default behavior, but it's consistent and so encapsulation is preserved. As an example, the default constructor of UriBuilder initializes its internal values to a consistent set that will build the Uri unless one or more of its properties are subsequently manipulated. If a default constructor can assign meaningful default values to all contained fields a default constructor still protects the invariants of the class. There are still scenarios where default constructors are in order (I'm sure there are more than those listed here). Thus, default constructors might indicate that encapsulation is broken. In the (very common) case where no meaningful default value can be defined, the data must be provided via the constructor. Whenever an object contains data, the data must be encapsulated. A default constructor would not have been fail-safe, since it would introduce a temporal coupling.Ĭonsider that objects are supposed to be containers of behavior and data. Since this class requires the name to implement its behavior, requesting it through the constructor is the correct thing to do. The Fragrance class protects the integrity of the name by requiring it through the constructor. In a previous post I described how a constructor with arguments statically advertises that the argument is required: This is fail-safe design because the compiler can enforce the relationship, thus providing rapid feedback. If you have read my book you will know that Constructor Injection is the dominating DI pattern exactly because it statically advertises dependencies and protects the integrity of those dependencies by guaranteeing that an initialized consumer is always in a consistent state. This indicates that whenever a certain idiom or pattern (in this case a default constructor) is encountered in code it should trigger further investigation.Īs I will outline below, there are several scenarios where default constructors are perfectly fine, so the purpose of this blog post is not to thunder against default constructors. Please be aware that this post represents a smell. That's a rather weak statement about the invariants of the class. Conversely, a default constructor implies that no external data is required. When data is required, it must often be supplied through a constructor. Encapsulation means that the class should protect the integrity of the data it encapsulates. That probably sounds outrageous, but consider this: object-orientation is about encapsulating behavior and data into cohesive pieces of code (classes). This post is the fifth in a series about Poka-yoke Design - also known as encapsulation.ĭefault constructors are code smells.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |