Re: [boost] [Boost.utility]

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost.utility]
From: Andrew Chinkoff (achinkoff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-26 10:28:48

> However, I've always thought the better interface was via a smart pointer. 
Upon construction, the smart 
> pointer would access the Singleton instance and cache it in a data member. 
> Subsequent access via 
> operator ->() or operator *() would use the data member, thus avoiding the
> overhead of the instance 
> accessor. 

I think this is unnecessary. The very simple and obvious way is access via
reference, don't it?

> They do access global state, but there often is global state in an
> application.  If Singletons provide the only > means to access state, they
> formalize that access.  Singletons can also, using policies, control
> lifetime, 
> post-destruction behavior, etc.  

It it really true.

> Consequently, Singletons are more than a crutch, though often overused,
> abused, or misused.

I disagree.

-- 
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/-Boost.utility--tp27309940p27324463.html
Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.