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
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
> post-destruction behavior, etc.
It it really true.
> Consequently, Singletons are more than a crutch, though often overused,
> abused, or misused.
-- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/-Boost.utility--tp27309940p27324463.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk