I am having a discussion with my co-worker on how much work a constructor can do. I have a class, B that internally requires another object A. Object A is one of a few members that class B needs to do its job.All of its public methods depends on the internal object A. Information about object A is stored in the DB so I try to validate and get it by looking it up on the DB in the constructor. My co-worker pointed out that the constructor should not do much work other than capture the constructor parameters. Since all of public methods would fail anyway if object A is not found using the inputs to the constructor, I argued that instead of allowing an instance to be created and later fail, it is actually better to throw early in constructor. Not all classes do this but i found that StreamWriter constructor also throws if it has problem opening a file and doesn't delay the validation until the first call to Write.What others think? I am using C# if that makes any difference.Reading Is there ever a reason to do all an object's work in a constructor? i wonder fetching object A by going to DB is part of any other initialization necessary to make the object ready to use because if user passed in wrong values to the constructor, i wouldn't be able to use any of its public methods.Constructors should instantiate the fields of an object and do any  other initialization necessary to make the object ready to use. This  is generally means constructors are small, but there are scenarios  where this would be a substantial amount of work.
how complex a constructor should be
c#;constructors
Your question is composed from two completely separate parts:Should I throw exception from constructor, or should I have method fail?This is clearly application of Fail-fast principle. Making constructor fail is much easier to debug compared to having to find why the method is failing. For example, you might get the instance already created from some other part of code and you get errors when calling methods. Is it obvious the object is created wrong? No.As for the wrap the call in try/catch problem. Exceptions are meant to be exceptional. If you know some code will throw an exception, you do not wrap the code in try/catch, but you validate parameters of that code before you execute the code that can throw an exception. Exceptions are only meant as way to ensure the system doesn't get into invalid state. If you know some input parameters can lead to invalid state, you make sure those parameters never happen. This way, you only have to do try/catch in places, where you can logically handle the exception, which is usually on system's boundary.Can I access other parts of the system, like DB from constructor.I think this goes against principle of least astonishment. Not many people would expect constructor to access a DB. So no, you should not do that.