Nice. I normally prefer to use runtime checks and exceptions, but for more complex objects the multiple interfaces may pay up? Here's an idea for a followup video: You have three classes: an abstract Base class and classes A and B which extend it. Create builders for them without code duplication.
Thanks for the explanation. I feel like this is only needed because of modern features that other languages have and Java doesn't. I had some experience with Dart and I loved its named constructors and named mandatory and optional parameters. I will never understand why this doesn't get added to Java
Coding setters as chain-able methods is always satisfying: instead of- void setX () { … } using- ClassName setX() { … return this; } so you can theoretically: object.setX( v1 ).setY( v2 )… The only issue is if the setter’s aren’t final (returning a value other than this)- setters should probably be final anyhow (unless you have some sort of EventDispatch system).
Java seriously needs to consider adding support for named parameters. There is just too much one needs to to in order to have the same functionality as python, dart and kotlin named parameters (it would also help a lot with deconstruction patterns, which they are trying to get good using the new proposed "with" keyword
I always tell people that builders are just shitty excuses for named parameters. I tend to shy away from them because I hate them with a passion. Use smaller objects that can be composed into larger objects, link this with some domain driven design (a name might be a string, but an Email sure as hell shouldn't be), and there's way less issues. Also static factory methods >>> constructors.
What topic would you be interested in learning about next?
Any design pattern will be valuable 🤗
Thanks for the video. Explained very well compared to some of the other tutorials I've seen online.
I love this no-fluff approach. Simple and straight to the point. Sub +1
Thank you!
also lombok @Builder makes the job easier, thanks good video
Nice. I normally prefer to use runtime checks and exceptions, but for more complex objects the multiple interfaces may pay up?
Here's an idea for a followup video: You have three classes: an abstract Base class and classes A and B which extend it. Create builders for them without code duplication.
Wow, very impressive explanation and coding style. The channel I was looking for but didn't know existed. Thank you very much!
I like your explanations so much! Always on point and really helpful, great job 👍
Thank you :)
Thanks for the explanation. I feel like this is only needed because of modern features that other languages have and Java doesn't.
I had some experience with Dart and I loved its named constructors and named mandatory and optional parameters. I will never understand why this doesn't get added to Java
Your best video.
Love the way you think ❤
You can use also a Record class, the fields in a record class are immutable as well.
Awesome!! Subscribed
Nice explanation, can't wait for more
Coding setters as chain-able methods is always satisfying:
instead of- void setX () { … }
using- ClassName setX() { … return this; }
so you can theoretically:
object.setX( v1 ).setY( v2 )…
The only issue is if the setter’s aren’t final (returning a value other than this)- setters should probably be final anyhow (unless you have some sort of EventDispatch system).
Thanks a lot for this video! +1 sub, so don't stop recording the interesting videos :)
Very good explanation 🎉
Love it and subscribed after watching fist 15 seconds of this video.❤
That was a fast explanation 👏
Java seriously needs to consider adding support for named parameters. There is just too much one needs to to in order to have the same functionality as python, dart and kotlin named parameters (it would also help a lot with deconstruction patterns, which they are trying to get good using the new proposed "with" keyword
WOW, explained more in 3 min than some books...
Can you pls create complete playlist for along with real time project in Java 8 for collage student
Working on it! I have a live coding project here, where I implement an ArrayList in real time ruclips.net/video/P2P-ZUvIsZM/видео.html
@@Jack_Hodkinson Thank you very much
I am your 1000th number Subscriber
Thank you! Welcome
It is so mind boggling that you have imbibed so much into a 3 minute video!
Would this be needed if Java had named parameters?
Good question. Not really!
I always tell people that builders are just shitty excuses for named parameters. I tend to shy away from them because I hate them with a passion. Use smaller objects that can be composed into larger objects, link this with some domain driven design (a name might be a string, but an Email sure as hell shouldn't be), and there's way less issues. Also static factory methods >>> constructors.
Could you share the editor theme from the examples?
Hi, the examples are all written in markdown using Marp (marp.app/). I use the Visual Studio Code extension.
wonderful
Subscribed
Thank you!
real
why just return class object in setter? so alots of codes are removed and result is the same.
No, otherwise you wouldn't be able to chain them
then you have a class that is mutable. might not what you want when immutability is intended.
Wholy crap,then we wonder why coding is overcomplicated and breaks when new releases of Java come out.
too much work