Re: New RFC draft "static class constructor"

On Tue, 2015-04-14 at 11:49 +0200, Johannes Ott wrote: > Am 14.04.2015 um 00:16 schrieb Levi Morrison: > >> - IMO, the method should be called when the class is created, just after every parent > >> class and implemented interfaces are created. > > > > In general I think static class data and static class constructors are > > a sign of poorly designed code, which means I am against this feature. > > Thanks for the flowers as we would say in Germany! I didn't hear I'm > doing poor code for a long time now :( If static elements need initialisation they apparently have state. If they have state they in 95% of the cases shouldn't be static but bound to an object instance. Yes there might be cases where this is a good design, but the language should provide the syntax sugar to lead the 95% to write good code instead of leading them to write bad code which can be tested harder and where changes might have unexpected side-effects. So even if you're code is good and your own use-case is good design, which I won't question, I don't think advertising it to all users by providing a language feature is good. johannes

Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] This is a digitally signed message part signature.asc