Timeline for What are the advantages of Builder Pattern of GoF?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:40 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/ | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:45 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 18:45 | comment | added | svidgen | @whatsisname Oh, I don't disagree. But, in general, I agree with some folks on the interwebs that constructors shouldn't... let's say, they shouldn't be fussy. Object construction seems to have more of an implied "easiness" about it. I don't normally expect new to fail if I've supplied all of the parameters. A Build(), on the other hand, suggests much more strongly to me, that "this will fail if you've given me bad materials." ... It's not a hard and fast rule, but it's a general expectation. | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 18:40 | history | edited | svidgen | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 61 characters in body |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 18:27 | history | edited | svidgen | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 61 characters in body |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 18:18 | history | edited | svidgen | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 196 characters in body |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 18:16 | comment | added | whatsisname | Throwing an exception is not necessarily frowned upon for constructors, and in many paradigms it is the expected thing to do, such as in RAII. | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 18:13 | history | answered | svidgen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |