Re^3: Are global variables "bad"?

I don't actually see any particular reason to use a singleton in this case: You are parsing a file, and want to store it someplace. There is no particular reason (from what you've said) why parsing a different file, or even reparsing the file should be prevented. (Besides the fact of memory useage/speed, which to me isn't a reason for a singleton, just a reason to keep using the same object.)

Basically, it's extra complexity to prevent future uses. I don't see why either would be something you want.

Comment on Re^3: Are global variables "bad"?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Are global variables "bad"? by Porculus (Hermit) on Apr 21, 2009 at 19:38 UTC
Agreed. The singleton is, when you get right down to it, really just a hack to add global variables to Java in an "object-oriented" way, dignified with a fancy name and notable mainly for being the design pattern people are by far the most likely to be able to remember off the tops of their heads. There are very few cases where singletons add value in a language like Perl. If your code is worth the effort of moving away from global variables, it's worth the effort of generalising completely (for example, allowing people to have multiple data sets open at once).	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^4: Are global variables "bad"?
by Porculus (Hermit) on Apr 21, 2009 at 19:38 UTC

Agreed. The singleton is, when you get right down to it, really just a hack to add global variables to Java in an "object-oriented" way, dignified with a fancy name and notable mainly for being the design pattern people are by far the most likely to be able to remember off the tops of their heads.

There are very few cases where singletons add value in a language like Perl. If your code is worth the effort of moving away from global variables, it's worth the effort of generalising completely (for example, allowing people to have multiple data sets open at once).

[reply]