• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
RE: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?


  • Subject: RE: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?
  • From: Jeff Laing <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 16:22:13 +1100

> > Alright, I do know that it might really be an NSMutableString under
> > the covers so its a poor example.
>
> Actually this is a very good example. In this case, you want to work
> with this string and make sure that nothing you don't have control
> over will change it, and so you want to copy it. You shouldn't be
> concerned whether it's actually an NSString, or an NSMutableString
> disguised as a string.

Agreed, which makes it *not* a good example when discussing singletons.

> By "functionally independent" I take it to mean that if you change
> any of the values of the object and its variables, then this only
> changes the object that you have as a copy. ... in the case of a
> singleton, the object variables of the copy are the same as the
> object variables of the original, which I think breaks the contract
> of the NSCopying protocol. Please correct me if I am wrong here.

I don't think you are wrong, according to the letter of the contract. But I
suspect this is one of those cases where no-one cares to uphold the exact
letter of the law.

Shaun and Malcolm have already pointed out two scenarios where copying of a
singleton might happen, even though the copier didn't want a "writable" copy
or even an "functionally independent" one. But because they were the
general case (dictionary keys, accessors), they were *required* to take the
copy

In both cases, I think, the probability of the scenarios actually happening
(one of my accessors returning the [NSDocumentController sharedInstance], or
using it as a key in a dictionary) are pretty small. But I concede that
they are not completely irrational, so it does make sense for your singleton
to munge copyWithZone:
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?
      • From: Shaun Wexler <email@hidden>
  • Prev by Date: Re: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?
  • Next by Date: Re: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?
  • Next by thread: Re: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread