I'm not sure what Builder would have to do with default parameters and named arguments.
Builder is extremely useful to pair with a parser, e.g. SAX. The parser parses the input, and the builder then decides what to do with it.
I'm not sure what Builder would have to do with default parameters and named arguments.
Builder is extremely useful to pair with a parser, e.g. SAX. The parser parses the input, and the builder then decides what to do with it.
Here is an example of the Builder pattern that illustrates my point: https://www.baeldung.com/java-builder-pattern#bd-classic-bui...
Let’s remove the category argument and you get this:
This builder is a more readable alternative to this: But if Java supported named arguments and default values (the default would be null), this could just be:Funny part is that Java does have named parameters, but only for annotations!