Re: [boost] [Boost.utility]

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost.utility]
From: Andrew Chinkoff (achinkoff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-26 06:21:18

> There have been many suggestions in the past of singleton
> implementations to this list, all flawed in subtle and not so subtle
> ways. I strongly recommend finding those and the feedback on them and
> understand them. 

I found these suggestions. As often happens, write again - it is easier than
learning the old suggestions. I glanced at the debate
[http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2008/01/index.php]. And I decided to
use self singleton implementation because of:
1) it has already written and usual for me (despite the fact that it is
rigid and does not have any policies);
2) at the moment I do not have sufficient time for feedback and
understanding the [http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2008/01/index.php]
debate (but this is certainly an interesting practice).

> Again, I recommend researching why the previous ambitious attempts have
> not been universally accepted. 

So, I am to reject my ambitious boost::Singleton request. It remains for my
personal use only.

P.S.: could anybody tell your experience of Loki::Singleton?

-- 
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/-Boost.utility--tp27309940p27321121.html
Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.