That would depend on if the constructor actually *does* something. If it needs to set up a connection pool, parse an XML configuration file, or whatever, then you have the choice of,
- doing this once, reliably, in the constructor, or - making sure that every single last static method checks to see if this has already been done. If the singleton needs to acquire, or process a resource in order to function, then 'construction is resource acquisition' should save a lot of typing and bug hunting. Dan. > -----Original Message----- > From: Felipe Schnack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 28 January 2003 21:56 > To: Tomcat Users List > Subject: about singletons (ot) > > > These days I was thinking > It's not so uncommon to have uses for singleton classes in our > everyday lives. Normally we do that implementing a class that have its > constructor as private, so no one can instantiate it, and a > getInstance() method or something like it. We wouldn't have the same > kind of behavior if we simply declare all class methods/fields as > static? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
