Re: [boost] Re: Singleton

From: Jason Hise (chaos_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-01-10 22:16:04

Philippe Mori wrote:

> ...what is needed to cover such cases is the ability to set the object 
> in a "destroying" state.
> A solution that could work in some situation would be something 
> similar to:
>
> Singleton::Deconnect()
> {
>    if (object)
>    {
>        object->Deconnect();
>    }
> }
>
> Well, the way to do the deconnection on the object hold by the 
> singleton would not be an hard-coded member but something that would 
> be settable by a policy class or some other template mean (for
> example, type trait).

I may be confused, but why couldn't (or shouldn't) this code be taken 
care of by the singleton's destructor in the derived class?  It would 
seem that the derived singleton is the only thing that could possibly 
know about the specific things it needs to deallocate, and that a 
destructor would be a natural place to take care of it.

-Jason