On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 8:04 PM, WT <jrca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From the testing I've done - creating several threads, each invoking either
> [MySingleton sharedInstance] or [[MySingleton alloc] init] after a randomly
> selected sleep time, and running the test anew several times - it appears to
> behave correctly, that is, the same instance is used in every thread, it's
> always properly initialized (all "instances" have the same value for
> someInteger), and each of the three dispatch_once() blocks is executed
> exactly once, no matter how many threads were created.
Do you really need a singleton, or just a default instance? For
example, NSFileManager has a default instance, but you can still
alloc/init your own if you want.
If all you need is a shared instance, then this will work just dandy
for any class:
+ (id)sharedInstance {
static id sharedInstance;
static dispatch_once_t once;
dispatch_once(&once, ^{ sharedInstance = [[self alloc] init]; });
return sharedInstance;
}
As for your code:
> // MySingleton.h:
>
> #import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
>
> @interface MySingleton: NSObject
> {
> NSUInteger someInteger_;
> }
>
> @property (readwrite, nonatomic, assign) NSUInteger someInteger;
>
> + (MySingleton*) sharedInstance;
>
> @end
>
> // MySingleton.m:
>
> #import <dispatch/dispatch.h>
> #import "MySingleton.h"
> #import <stdlib.h>
> #import <time.h>
>
> static MySingleton* stSharedInstance = nil;
>
> static dispatch_once_t stSharedInstanceInvoked;
> static dispatch_once_t stAllocWithZoneInvoked;
> static dispatch_once_t stInitInvoked;
All of these could be made static variables within the method body,
increasing readability and reducing pollution of the global scope
without affecting storage longevity.
>
> @implementation MySingleton
>
> @synthesize someInteger = someInteger_;
>
>
> + (MySingleton*) sharedInstance;
> {
> dispatch_once(&stSharedInstanceInvoked,
> ^{
> NSLog(@"+sharedInstance block entered");
>
> // Assignment done in +allocWithZone:.
> // The autorelease message is sent to prevent XCode's
> // static analyzer from issuing a warning about a possible
> // memory leak. There is no leak, since the singleton is
> // not meant to be deallocated, and the autorelease message
> // does nothing, as per its overridden implementation below.
Rather than relying on -allocWithZone: to return the shared instance,
why not assign to stSharedInstance here?
>
> [[[[self class] alloc] init] autorelease];
You are in a class method. self == [self class], so no need to call +class here.
>
> NSLog(@"+sharedInstance block exited");
> });
>
> return stSharedInstance;
> }
>
>
> + (id) allocWithZone: (NSZone*) zone;
> {
> dispatch_once(&stAllocWithZoneInvoked,
> ^{
> NSLog(@"+allocWithZone: block entered");
>
> stSharedInstance = [super allocWithZone: zone];
>
> NSLog(@"+allocWithZone: block exited");
> });
>
> return stSharedInstance;
Of course this means you can't subclass this class.
> }
>
>
> - (id) init;
> {
> __block id tempSelf = self;
Because the block is not going to be copied, you do not need to worry
about creating a __block version of self here. And since this is a
singleton, even if the block *were* copied (and thus self retained),
you still wouldn't care.
>
> dispatch_once(&stInitInvoked,
> ^{
> NSLog(@"-init block entered");
>
> tempSelf = [super init];
>
> if (tempSelf)
> {
> someInteger_ = random() % 1000;
> NSLog(@"Instance initialized");
> }
>
> NSLog(@"-init block exited");
> });
>
> self = tempSelf;
> return self;
> }
>
>
> - (id) copyWithZone: (NSZone*) zone;
> {
> return self;
By virtue of this implementation, you can't implement NSCopying in a
subclass. But you can't subclass this class anyway because of
+allocWithZone:.
> }
>
>
> - (id) retain;
> {
> return self;
> }
>
>
> - (unsigned) retainCount;
> {
> return UINT_MAX; // Denotes an object that cannot be released.
Why bother? All this will do is mask any bugs where your singleton disappears.
> }
>
>
> - (void) release;
> {
> /* do nothing */
Don't do this. As above, you're just masking cases where you
accidentally over-release your singleton.
> }
>
>
> - (id) autorelease;
> {
> return self;
> }
Look, you're going to great lengths to ensure you never create more
than one instance of this class. Is any of it really necessary?
--Kyle Sluder
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
