Boost logo

Boost :

From: Pierre-Jules Tremblay (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-01-17 12:19:36

On Jan 17, 2008 2:15 AM, Johan Nilsson <r.johan.nilsson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> Did you notice that it is possible to use multiple inheritance? This
> >> way you can implement and test your domain-specific logic as a
> >> "normal" class, and then just expose a singleton of that specific
> >> type using e.g. boost::singleton<>.
> >
> > Yes, it makes it possible to test the class to be wrapped as a
> > singleton. That's the easy part. The hard part is to make the
> > singleton's client code testable.
> >
> > If I have a singleton class A that wraps a "regular" class B, I can
> > test B independently of A. However, I have no way to test any code
> > that calls A::instance to get to B.
> That's why you should use dependency injection instead of designing the
> client code to directly call A::instance(). Why does the client code need to
> know it is accessing a singleton, when all it wants is the domain-specific
> logic?

I agree and advocate for dependency injection myself. But your
original comment was that somehow Tobias' singleton's
multiple-inheritance support makes it possible to test the code. I'm
saying it only enables you to test the
class-to-be-used-as-a-singleton's code, not the client code. Now
you're saying the client code shouldn't depend on the class being used
as a singleton. I agree, but Tobias' design doesn't make that use
case possible, so what are you suggesting (in the context of this
particular review)?


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at