Do not generate constructors with no-arg super()

[Steve973]

I notice that, when I generate a class with constructors, it inserts super(); as the first line. This is 2025, and we all know that this is never, ever necessary, so you should avoid calls to super unless you need to pass arguments. If linting gets executed on the generated directories, this will create a finding. Sure, we can add exceptions, but this should really not be part of the generated code.

I am curious if there are cases where this utility generates child classes of other classes that do not include a no-args constructor. If this line gets inserted unconditionally, then this would produce code that will not compile. If this is not inserted unconditionally, then the question remains about why it is generated when it is not passing any arguments.

[eirnym]

The explicit super() does nothing in Java as it's always called implicitly if no explicit super() calls are done. So the only difference is in Java style. I haven't found any article which shows, that bytecode produced with super() included is different from code without it. I'd like to read one if there's any.

I'm totally agree with your in terms of aesthetics in most of the code, but I'm personally ignoring it for generated code.