Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
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.
What is the rationale of not providing no-arg constructors in Wrapper Classes? I know that they were inherently built for Wrapping primitive types, so the right way is to provide a primitive type for constructors.
However, considering primitive types have no-arg constructor, why don’t they have one?
Besides, if they had no-arg constructors, they could be instantiated as T.class.newInstance(). However, since newInstance() requires no-arg constructor, this won’t work with Wrapper Classes.
Wrapper objects are immutable. This means that once a wrapper object has a value assigned to it, that value cannot be changed. It doesn’t make much sense to have a default value for an object whose value can’t be changed. You wouldn’t want to get a
newInstance()of a wrapper class, because then you’d be stuck with the default value.