🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 05:11:29 +1000, dion@multitask.com.au (Dion
Gillard) wrote:

>In article <378c7224.5379925@forums.inprise.com>, 
>Tom.Eugelink@OVSoftware.com says...
>|  On 13 Jul 1999 11:06:11 +0200, Tor Iver Wilhelmsen
>|  <tor.wilhelmsen@sds.no> wrote:
>|  
>|  >Tom.Eugelink@OVSoftware.com writes:
>|  >
>|  >> Afterall, I did enter the constructor of the fireman class, so I feel
>|  >> that that is enough reason to have all instance variables not only
>|  >> allocated but also declared.
>|  >
>|  >No, because the language _specifies_ that the superclass constructor
>|  >is called first (all the way down to Object) before initialization of
>|  >fields happens. This is known behaviour.
>|  
>|  Well, then we can conclude that I do not agree with that
>|  specification, unless someone explains the reason for it to me.
>
>We can indeed conclude this. The reason is consistency. Why have two ways 
>to determine which method should be called, based on whether you're in 
>the super class' constructor or not?

Ah, no. That is not what I mean with: when allocating instance
variable memory also initialize instance variables, do not wait for
the constructor to be entered. 

This does not result in two different ways, just in one another way.

Tom