Benefit of using static inner builder class
<p>During the course of writing the code guidelines for a company I found myself recommending using the <a href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5007355/builder-pattern-in-effective-java">Builder pattern</a> from Effective Java, instead of telescopic constructors.</p>

<p>However, after thinking about it a bit more, surely a more elegant solution is to just remove the builder class and the also remove the extra constructors with optional arguments. </p>

<p>So just have the one constructor with required parameters, normal getters/setters, and comment the code. When implementing just create a new instance of yr object then set values.</p>

<p>My original thinking was the benefit came from removing the confusion as to what paramters were optional and what were required; however the true benefit comes from using method chaining/fluent interface.</p>

<p>The builder pattern has benefits when you make lots of new instances as the ide can do the leg work and also if there are many (15+) optional parameters. However, is it worth the extra time coding the static inner class, would you recommend using the builder, or is it a waste of time ? </p>
