|
|
|
|
|
by nuerow
1706 days ago
|
|
> Have you actually read the definition(s) of the singleton pattern? E.g. Wikipedia: "In software engineering, the singleton pattern is a software design pattern that restricts the instantiation of a class to one "single" instance." Yes, I did. I also know what a singleton is, and the whole point it's a thing. Did you read my explanation were I pointed out your misconceptions? > Also, make sure to read the criticism on the Wikipedia page - I think the criticism there is enough to classify it as an antipattern, You should first take your own advice into consideration and first read your sources before citing them. If you did before succumbing to your appeal to authority, you would have noticed the fact that your whole argument that singletons supposedly were an anti-pattern is what, and I quote, "it is frequently used in scenarios where it is not beneficial" because of the global state. Do you understand the problem with the way you're trying to generalize an assertion, specially given that enforcing a global state is often the whole point of using a singleton? If you fail to understand how/why/when a technique is used, that does not make it an anti-pattern. Lastly, please get acquainted with HN's guidelines on commenting as your last comment goes against a few principles stated in them. |
|
> Lastly, please get acquainted with HN's guidelines on commenting as your last comment goes against a few principles stated in them.
I think you are just misunderstanding me (and the OP) and I'm trying to clarify. I don't see which principle I would violate with that.