I was watching a video regarding design patterns and the youtuber made an example of the builder pattern…
I didn’t know about the pattern(there is a reason why I was watching the videos); But I had encounter the same type of problems so what I usually did was to return null to the fields I didn’t had their data.
Is it wrong what I was doing?
At the end the builder will make the object with a null data and realistically it takes the same amount of code…
If null is a valid value for the field there is no reason why a builder should not construct an object where the field is null.
The only thing i dislike about the pattern is that a class utilizing the builder to retrieve the object has to know a lot about how the object has to be constructed, however it makes for very readable code imho.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !programming@programming.dev
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person’s post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you’re posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don’t want to watch videos
If null is a valid value for the field there is no reason why a builder should not construct an object where the field is null.
The only thing i dislike about the pattern is that a class utilizing the builder to retrieve the object has to know a lot about how the object has to be constructed, however it makes for very readable code imho.