Re: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?
Re: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?
- Subject: Re: Is Apple's singleton sample code correct?
- From: Dirk Stegemann <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 05:58:02 +0200
Hi,
Am 04.12.2005 um 05:08 schrieb Andreas Mayer:
Am 04.12.2005 um 03:06 Uhr schrieb Dirk Stegemann:
What is the sound and important technical reason for overriding
the reference counting methods in the case of a singleton ?
To prevent it's accidental deallocation, when no other objects
happen to be retaining it.
(...)
This is a general problem which applies to all kinds of objects,
be they singletons or non-singeltons,
(...)
Following the argumentation of the advocators of the "Overwrite
the -dealloc method to do nothing" approach, this problem doesn't
apply to the singleton objects,
Provided that there is no memory management error in the
application, the singleton will not be deallocated, since it
basically retains itself. The normal Cocoa memory management rules
DO apply.
No overwrite of dealloc needed.
I thought that somebody stated some time ago -- within this thread --
that the singleton should be "*guaranteed* to exist during entire
life time of the application"; then IMHO the implementation should
even be bullet-proof against over-releasing/-deallocating.
But I cannot find this statement now, neither is it said in that
piece of documentation which caused the OP's request in the first place.
So I agree now.
Best regards,
Dirk Stegemann
_______________________________________________
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