Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 7930941
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 3, 20262026-06-03T20:34:30+00:00 2026-06-03T20:34:30+00:00

Can I avoid initializing this? I have a simple factory with no constructor .

  • 0

Can I avoid initializing this?

I have a simple factory with no constructor. I use it like this:

var slf = new GenericSelectListFactory();
vm.Works = slf.getWorkgsl(0);
vm.Cars = slf.getCargsl(0);

I can also use it like this:

vm.Cars = new GenericSelectListFactory().getCargsl(0);

Is there any way to use it without the new keyword?

vm.Cars = GenericSelectListFactory.getCargsl(0);
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-03T20:34:32+00:00Added an answer on June 3, 2026 at 8:34 pm

    Make the method of your class static.

    class GenericSelectListFactory
    {
       public static List<Cars> getCargsl()
       {
          // your logic here
       }
    
    }
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Can I avoid third party code from creating new threads, starting new VMs, or
how can I avoid this in jQuery: $(this).parents(.node-inner).children().children().children(); I tried: $(this).parents(.node-inner).children(.className); but it doesn't
Do we have any operator in C# by which I can avoid short circuit
With SQL Server's transaction isolation levels, you can avoid certain unwanted concurrency issues, like
When you need to check/have combinations of array elements, how can you avoid nesting
I would like to see if I can avoid a lengthy switch or if
I can't get my head around this and I could really use some help.
Is there a way I can avoid using this for multiple pattern checks? Can
I was wondering how I can avoid to use onClick here. I don't want
I hope someone can give me a hand figuring this out. I have been

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.