In Solidity, can the constructor function have the same name as the contract?

Question

According to this article, the constructor - or initialization - function has the same name as the contract. However, the remix compiler returns an error when I have a function with the same name, saying "defining constructors as functions with the same name as the contract is deprecated. Use "constructor(...) { ... }" instead."

So, my question is, is using the same name in this situation something that should simply be avoided? (Perhaps it is an out of date practice?)

Answer 1

Since Solidity v0.4.23, constructors are now specified using the constructor keyword:

    constructor () {}

Just to compare with the old ways, say we have a Smart Contract called Employee, in the past, you'd specify the contract with its constructor like this:

    contract Employee {
      // constructor
      function Employee() public {
        // ...
      }
    }

But the acceptable way to specify the Employee Smart Contract now is:

    contract Employee {
      // constructor
      constructor() public {
        // ...
      }
    }

Using the name of a contract as its constructor is now deprecated.