search

pwightman / nfa_evaluator

NFA evaluation
1 stars 1 forks source link

Private constructor #1

Closed pwightman closed 12 years ago

pwightman commented 12 years ago

Can someone remind me again why we're using createNfa instead of just using an overloaded Nfa constructor?

ghost commented 12 years ago

I liked it better. I don't know if there was any particular reason.

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Parker < reply@reply.github.com

wrote:

Can someone remind me again why we're using createNfa instead of just using an overloaded Nfa constructor?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/pwightman/nfa_evaluator/issues/1

pwightman commented 12 years ago

Fair enough.

ghost commented 12 years ago

I had a reason, I just can't remember it. I think it made something easier somehow...

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Michael Hogenson mah.general@gmail.comwrote:

I liked it better. I don't know if there was any particular reason.

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Parker < reply@reply.github.com

wrote:

Can someone remind me again why we're using createNfa instead of just using an overloaded Nfa constructor?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/pwightman/nfa_evaluator/issues/1

pwightman commented 12 years ago

I remember something about how we wanted to make the default, no-argument constructor private so people can't create an Nfa's without supplying all the parameters. But I don't remember why it was advantageous over an overloaded constructor. I'm fine with keeping it if you prefer it, I just wondered.