Skip to main content
14 events
when toggle format what by license comment
S Jul 20, 2015 at 9:35 history edited gnat CC BY-SA 3.0
overly broad += http://meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/6483/why-was-my-question-closed-or-down-voted/6490#6490
S Jul 20, 2015 at 9:35 history suggested Mike
more clear tags
Jul 20, 2015 at 9:34 history protected gnat
Jul 20, 2015 at 8:59 review Suggested edits
S Jul 20, 2015 at 9:35
Nov 15, 2014 at 18:14 comment added supercat @DonalFellows: I wonder if there would have been any fundamental problems in Java or .NET with having a special syntax for invoking private constructors (e.g. new this(args), and having new className(args) invoke a static method className.ctor(args) [which for most classes could be auto-generated to simply return new this(args)]? I would think that would simplify the frameworks, and would also allow a constructor of class T to distinguish easily whether it was being used to construct a T, or prepare the base of something derived from T.
Jun 6, 2011 at 21:09 vote accept Phil.Wheeler
Jun 6, 2011 at 12:13 history tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackProgrammer/status/77709782831726592
Jun 6, 2011 at 10:38 comment added Donal Fellows Ah, Factory Method. A workaround for the fact that new isn't a method (in some – admittedly common – object systems).
Jun 6, 2011 at 9:49 answer added pdr timeline score: 49
Jun 6, 2011 at 9:48 comment added Phil.Wheeler To be fair, the two phrases seem to be pretty commonly interchanged.
Jun 6, 2011 at 9:47 comment added Phil.Wheeler Yes - Factory Method.
Jun 6, 2011 at 9:35 comment added Thomas Owens To clarify, do you mean "Factory Method" when you say "Factory Pattern"? If you are talking about the Gang of Four patterns, there is no Factory Pattern, but there are Abstract Factory and Factory Method.
Jun 6, 2011 at 9:32 comment added Natrium stackoverflow.com/questions/1001767/…
Jun 6, 2011 at 9:25 history asked Phil.Wheeler CC BY-SA 3.0