Ivan
04/25/2019, 8:15 PMolonho
04/25/2019, 8:43 PMClass.forName
is not supported, and is generally considered bad style. Usually, there are other ways to solve same problem.Ivan
04/25/2019, 8:44 PMolonho
04/25/2019, 8:45 PMIvan
04/25/2019, 8:46 PMolonho
04/25/2019, 8:54 PMIvan
04/25/2019, 8:58 PMolonho
04/25/2019, 9:12 PMIvan
04/25/2019, 9:16 PMgildor
04/26/2019, 1:34 AMwhen it could add itself with 0 effort.And with limitation on class implementation, for example you should have default constructor, cannot pass anything else to construcotr, if class doesn’t follow this implicit contract it will crash on runtime, you never can delete/rename this class, make it abstract etc I would prefer proper factory even on JVM than such “0 effort”