-
-
Save theburningmonk/6401183 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
class MyClass { | |
static final MyClass _singleton = new MyClass._internal(); | |
factory MyClass() { | |
return _singleton; | |
} | |
MyClass._internal() { | |
... // initialization logic here | |
} | |
... // rest of the class | |
} | |
// consuming code | |
MyClass myObj = new MyClass(); // get back the singleton | |
... | |
// another piece of consuming code | |
MyClass myObj = new MyClass(); // still getting back the singleton |
The pattern proposed by @theburningmonk actually has a problem.
I just spent twenty minutes chasing down a bug which this pattern obscured.
The problem was that my _internal method was throwing an exception.
In the exception handler I was trying to reference the same factory instance. This caused an npe as _singleton was null (due to the _internal exception) so I got an npe rather than the original exception.
The following pattern avoids this issue:
class MyClass {
static MyClass _singleton;
factory MyClass() => _singleton ??= MyClass._internal();
MyClass._internal() {
... // initialization logic here
}
... // rest of the class
}
The only disadvantage is that _singleton can no longer be final.
Singleton design pattern is intended to create one and only one (single) instance of a class.
If you wanted a single instance with a parameter, how would you do that?
Do you see any issue in this code?
class MyClass {
MyClass._(this.parameter);
final String parameter;
static MyClass? _instance;
static void initialize(String parameter) {
_instance = MyClass._(parameter );
}
static MyClass get instance => _instance!; // throw an "initialize first" error
// access parameter
}
Singleton design pattern is intended to create one and only one (single) instance of a class.
If you wanted a single instance with a parameter, how would you do that?
Do you see any issue in this code?
This is not a singleton implementation.
See this for reference: Dart Null-Safty Singleton with parameters
Can MyClass extend an abstract class with non-null constructor? If so how?
This feels like an antipattern, singleton should be implemented with a private constructor and a static singleton class.
Having a constructor that returns the singleton on behind hides this detail from the developer.