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: Shaun Wexler <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:30:10 -0800
On Nov 29, 2005, at 10:05 AM, David Gimeno Gost wrote:
Then, Uli Kusterer provided a much better implementation using a
different approach: instead of overriding +allocWithZone: he chose
to override the -init method to ensure that only the instance
created by the +sharedInstance method is ever returned. What I like
most about this approach is not that the code is more self-
documenting, but that it completely eliminates another nasty side
effect that I haven't mentioned in the above paragraphs and that
any +allocWithZone:-based approach would have: the repeated -init
call problem.
For reasons that escape me, knowledgeable people in this list has
kept arguing with me that I shouldn't really be concerned at all
with the nasty side effects of the current Apple's sample code
implementation. No valid technical reason has been given to justify
that the singleton's -dealloc method should be prevented from ever
being called. Yet some people have gone as far as saying that the
functionality that everyone would put there for any other object,
should be put somewhere else for singletons, just because -dealloc
has been prevented from ever being called for no apparent reason.
Please refer to the "hardcore" singleton base superclass I posted a
few years ago:
<http://www.cocoabuilder.com/archive/message/cocoa/2004/2/13/97027>
--
Shaun Wexler
MacFOH
http://www.macfoh.com
_______________________________________________
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