Hi Stephen, Just taking a stab at it. Are any of the parameters in the overloaded constructors dependencies of the object being constructed? If the object requires these dependencies that would be a good reason to force the paramaterized constructors, as using the default would potentially leave the object in an unworkable state.
Cheers Dave On 6 March 2013 15:59, Stephen Price <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey all, > > The project i'm working on at the moment has some generated code from a > tool called MyGeneration TOOL. It has marked the default constructors of > the Data classes with: > > [Obsolete("For serialization only", false)] > > It would seem that they have ignored this and are using the default > constructors and then populating the properties, rather than calling the > overloads with parameters. In some cases it seems quite valid to just call > the default constructor (ie a new data object yet to be populated for > example). > > I've done some searching and can't find any justification for marking the > default constructors Obsolete. Given that the code is generated and then > manually pasted into the classes I'm tempted to just remove the Obsolete > attributes. It would clean up the Warnings generated drastically. Just want > to figure out if it might bite me for some reason down the track. > > flames, opinions, ideas, suggestions and feedback welcome :) > cheers, > Stephen >
