47 lines
890 B
Plaintext
47 lines
890 B
Plaintext
Since ``++abstract++`` classes can't be instantiated, there's no point in their having ``++public++`` or ``++internal++`` constructors. If there is basic initialization logic that should run when an extending class instance is created, you can by all means put it in a constructor, but make that constructor ``++private++`` or ``++protected++``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Noncompliant Code Example
|
|
|
|
----
|
|
abstract class Base
|
|
{
|
|
public Base() // Noncompliant, should be private or protected
|
|
{
|
|
//...
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Compliant Solution
|
|
|
|
----
|
|
abstract class Base
|
|
{
|
|
protected Base()
|
|
{
|
|
//...
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ifdef::env-github,rspecator-view[]
|
|
|
|
'''
|
|
== Implementation Specification
|
|
(visible only on this page)
|
|
|
|
include::message.adoc[]
|
|
|
|
include::highlighting.adoc[]
|
|
|
|
'''
|
|
== Comments And Links
|
|
(visible only on this page)
|
|
|
|
include::comments-and-links.adoc[]
|
|
endif::env-github,rspecator-view[]
|