这两种方法都有什么优势吗?
示例1:
class A {
B b = new B();
}
示例2:
class A {
B b;
A() {
b = new B();
}
}
这两种方法都有什么优势吗?
示例1:
class A {
B b = new B();
}
示例2:
class A {
B b;
A() {
b = new B();
}
}
当前回答
例2不太灵活。如果您添加了另一个构造函数,则需要记住在该构造函数中实例化字段。直接实例化字段,或者在getter中引入延迟加载。
如果实例化需要的不仅仅是一个简单的new,请使用初始化块。不管使用的构造函数是什么,这个函数都将运行。如。
public class A {
private Properties properties;
{
try {
properties = new Properties();
properties.load(Thread.currentThread().getContextClassLoader().getResourceAsStream("file.properties"));
} catch (IOException e) {
throw new ConfigurationException("Failed to load properties file.", e); // It's a subclass of RuntimeException.
}
}
// ...
}
其他回答
第二个例子是惰性初始化。第一个是更简单的初始化,它们本质上是一样的。
其实很不一样:
声明发生在构建之前。因此,如果在两个位置都初始化了变量(本例中为b),构造函数的初始化将取代在类级别所做的初始化。
所以在类级别声明变量,在构造函数中初始化它们。
这两种方法都可以接受。注意,在后一种情况下,如果存在另一个构造函数,b=new b()可能无法初始化。将构造函数外部的初始化器代码看作一个公共构造函数,代码将被执行。
There is one more subtle reason to initialize outside the constructor that no one has mentioned before (very specific I must say). If you are using UML tools to generate class diagrams from the code (reverse engineering), most of the tools I believe will note the initialization of Example 1 and will transfer it to a diagram (if you prefer it to show the initial values, like I do). They will not take these initial values from Example 2. Again, this is a very specific reason - if you are working with UML tools, but once I learned that, I am trying to take all my default values outside of constructor unless, as was mentioned before, there is an issue of possible exception throwing or complicated logic.
class MyClass extends FooClass {
String a = null;
public MyClass() {
super(); // Superclass calls init();
}
@Override
protected void init() {
super.init();
if (something)
a = getStringYadaYada();
}
}
关于以上,
String a = null;
Null init可以避免,因为它是默认值。 然而,如果您需要另一个默认值, 然后,由于初始化顺序不受控制, 我将修改如下:
class MyClass extends FooClass
{
String a;
{
if( a==null ) a="my custom default value";
}
...