Re: using weak_ptr and shared_ptr for singleton

From: Nicola Musatti (yg-boost-users_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-09 09:01:29

Stephan Born wrote:

> Nicola Musatti wrote:
> 
>>Within the singleton class I hold the instance with a shared_ptr. I 
>>consider this the best option, as it guarantees the correct order of 
>>destruction when a singleton depends on another one.
> 
> But I *want* it to be delete automagically...and I do not see the 
> danger: if there is a dependent second_singleton it would hold a 
> shared_ptr to my singleton, and singleton would not be destroyed before 
> second_singleton is destroyed by its own. Maybe it should be made an 
> option by using policies....but I really do not the danger.

I think we mean the same thing. The only thing I was pointing out is 
that my static data member that holds the pointer is a shared_ptr and 
not a weak_ptr. This is because I want my singleton instance to survive 
even if sometime during execution it isn't used by other objects, rather 
than be recreated each time as yours is.

Cheers,
Nicola Musatti