>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Yeah that's the same way that I implement it. You're still using
>> strings
>> for referencing class names.
>
> So what? Is there an alternative method? Does it have any advantages?
Yes! Moving the singleton functionality into c
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Yeah that's the same way that I implement it. You're still using strings
> for referencing class names.
So what? Is there an alternative method? Does it have any advantages?
> Sorry my file didn't get attached when sent to the list.
Yeah that's the same way that I implement it. You're still using strings
for referencing class names.
Sorry my file didn't get attached when sent to the list.
http://hlrally.net/media/singletonabc.inc
The advantages are:
- Speed improvements
- Allows for context sensitive code hinting in IDEs
-
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hi Tony,
>
> I do have a single singleton class to deal with singletons (as you put
> it).
> I have attached it to this email for your reference.
>
> But it's back to my original problem where you either have to:
> - Duplicate code fo
