Structural differences of constructor methods in object-oriented paradigms: a comparative study using C++, Java and Python / Jamal Othman ... [et al.]

Structure of a class in Object Oriented Programming involves the attributes and methods. The methods of a class normally consist of constructors, mutators, retrievers, processors and printers. Among these, constructor methods play a vital role in initializing objects and are essential in class construction within the Object-Oriented paradigm. Constructor method is the most important method in constructing a class. This article will compare the structure of constructor methods in three (3) different programming languages such as the C++, Java and Python, providing a clear comparison of how each language handles object initialization. These three programming languages support the Object-Oriented Paradigms. The comparative will be focusing on the syntaxes which are applied in each programming language to construct the constructor methods. Constructor methods can be categorized as default, normal and copy constructors and comparison of the three programming languages will be shown to compare the structure for each category of constructor methods. Understanding these differences is crucial for programmers who work with multiple languages and need to adapt their coding approaches accordingly.

Publication Details

Journal
UiTM Institutional Repositories (Universiti Teknologi MARA)
Published
2025-03-01
Primary Topic
Software Engineering Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Structural differences of constructor methods in object-oriented paradigms: a comparative study using C++, Java and Python / Jamal Othman ... [et al.]

UiTM Institutional Repositories (Universiti Teknologi MARA)
Software Engineering Research
article

Structural differences of constructor methods in object-oriented paradigms: a comparative study using C++, Java and Python / Jamal Othman ... [et al.]

article en

Abstract

Structure of a class in Object Oriented Programming involves the attributes and methods. The methods of a class normally consist of constructors, mutators, retrievers, processors and printers. Among these, constructor methods play a vital role in initializing objects and are essential in class construction within the Object-Oriented paradigm. Constructor method is the most important method in constructing a class. This article will compare the structure of constructor methods in three (3) different programming languages such as the C++, Java and Python, providing a clear comparison of how each language handles object initialization. These three programming languages support the Object-Oriented Paradigms. The comparative will be focusing on the syntaxes which are applied in each programming language to construct the constructor methods. Constructor methods can be categorized as default, normal and copy constructors and comparison of the three programming languages will be shown to compare the structure for each category of constructor methods. Understanding these differences is crucial for programmers who work with multiple languages and need to adapt their coding approaches accordingly.

UiTM Institutional Repositories (Universiti Teknologi MARA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 28%
Software Engineering Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Structural differences of constructor methods in object-oriented paradigms: a comparative study using C++, Java and Python / Jamal Othman ... [et al.] · UiTM Institutional Repositories (Universiti Teknologi MARA) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS