Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.datemas.de!rt.uk.eu.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Interface with implied Constructor
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 18:41:28 +0800
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <krgpcp$pba$1@speranza.aioe.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: jOhPn0KFjrxwuMc9OPMmCw.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:24716

Hi,

I have an interface that requires an implementer to cut code that 99% 
sure is going to need some variables that are built at run-time. The 
class to be developed will also be loaded at run-time via Reflection.

Most people I have consulted recommend going the null Constructor in 
combination with Setters, or an INIT() method, to communicate the 
ambient variables to the loaded class. I, on the other hand, would like 
to go the Constructor-Injection-esque root of attempting to invoke a 
version of the Contstructor with the arguments I specify. (Maybe 
failover to null constructor on InvocationException) Is there something 
intrinsically wrong with doing this in Java? (I know there are Abstract 
Classes but I have only Abstract Methods.)

If you like to know the real example then what I'd like to pass to the 
Constructor is the ParentFrame and an Application name. 
London-to-a-brick the callee will create a Dialog Box.

Cheers Richard Maher