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?
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.
If I define a custom constructor which means my object need initialising in a specific way e.g.:
class Customer
{
public Customer(string name) { this.Name = name; }
public string Name { get; }
}
If the compiler also added public Customer()
then you could bypass the requirement to initialise a customer with a name.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With