[Mono-dev] Re: Constructor implementation obligation via interface?
ympostor at clix.pt
Wed May 24 09:22:36 EDT 2006
Kamil Skalski escribió:
> There is a slight problem. In C# empty constructors are added
> automatically, so you can't define a class without empty constructor.
> What you can do is to define a class with private empty constructor,
> which will prevent user from instanciating it directly. I guess there
> is not way to forbid this.
Thanks for your comment.
But sorry because I think I haven't understood you completely.
You say I can't define a class without empty constructor? That's not
true. When you create an empty Console application in Visual Studio,
there is a "class Program" that contains an static method but does not
have any constructor.
If you were trying to say that all classes, at the compiler level,
contain an empty constructor, then ok; but what I want to do is to force
a class to have a public empty constructor, and, if it doesn't have it,
have the compiler to warn me because of the semantic requisite.
Is there a way to achieve this?
More information about the Mono-devel-list