How to improve the builder pattern?
- by tangens
Motivation
Recently I searched for a way to initialize a complex object without passing a lot of parameter to the constructor. I tried it with the builder pattern, but I don't like the fact, that I'm not able to check at compile time if I really set all needed values.
Traditional builder pattern
When I use the builder pattern to create my Complex object, the creation is more "typesafe", because it's easier to see what an argument is used for:
new ComplexBuilder()
.setFirst( "first" )
.setSecond( "second" )
.setThird( "third" )
...
.build();
But now I have the problem, that I can easily miss an important parameter. I can check for it inside the build() method, but that is only at runtime. At compile time there is nothing that warns me, if I missed something.
Enhanced builder pattern
Now my idea was to create a builder, that "reminds" me if I missed a needed parameter. My first try looks like this:
public class Complex {
private String m_first;
private String m_second;
private String m_third;
private Complex() {}
public static class ComplexBuilder {
private Complex m_complex;
public ComplexBuilder() {
m_complex = new Complex();
}
public Builder2 setFirst( String first ) {
m_complex.m_first = first;
return new Builder2();
}
public class Builder2 {
private Builder2() {}
Builder3 setSecond( String second ) {
m_complex.m_second = second;
return new Builder3();
}
}
public class Builder3 {
private Builder3() {}
Builder4 setThird( String third ) {
m_complex.m_third = third;
return new Builder4();
}
}
public class Builder4 {
private Builder4() {}
Complex build() {
return m_complex;
}
}
}
}
As you can see, each setter of the builder class returns a different internal builder class. Each internal builder class provides exactly one setter method and the last one provides only a build() method.
Now the construction of an object again looks like this:
new ComplexBuilder()
.setFirst( "first" )
.setSecond( "second" )
.setThird( "third" )
.build();
...but there is no way to forget a needed parameter. The compiler wouldn't accept it.
Optional parameters
If I had optional parameters, I would use the last internal builder class Builder4 to set them like a "traditional" builder does, returning itself.
Questions
Is this a well known pattern? Does it have a special name?
Do you see any pitfalls?
Do you have any ideas to improve the implementation - in the sense of fewer lines of code?
