On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:37:53 +0200, Diez B. Roggisch wrote: >> Two borgs, or two million, the whole point of using borgs is that it >> doesn't matter. > > It does matter where the classes live (module-wise). Which is the > problem the OP had, borg or not to borg.
Gotcha. Thanks for the demonstration code, that makes it clear. [snip] > You will see that there are _two_ different Borg-Cubes, as the output > indicates. This has hit me more than once, and Carl Banks pointed that > error out to the OP. > > And if you'd follow your own advice of " take each word to have it's > normal English meaning," then the OP is not > > "struggling to get a singleton working" > > but struggling to get "some sort of singleton working", as you cite > yourself, and first tried to implement his needs using no > singleton-recipe (or borg pattern) but a module: Using modules *is* a recipe for getting singletons, as the OP clearly understood. > Which didn't work out for the same reason his singleton approach didn't > work and your beloved Borg-pattern doesn't as well. It's not my beloved Borg-pattern. My original post asked: "Why do you need only one instance?" and suggested that *perhaps* he should *consider* an alternative. Sheesh. It's not like I said that the Borg solves every problem every time. -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
