J
jankeir
Guest
Yes, but that is probably a good thing here a basic example has the advantage of showing the concepts without too much code (in fact, it's probably already a little more advanced than you would want just for the purposes of demonstration.) As a response on the original question, many of the reasons why you may not always want a singleton (in the most traditional sense as a class with a private constructor and a public static instance accessor) can be found in the responses and links in this question: stackoverflow.com/.../why-is-singleton-considered-an-anti-pattern Living completely without 'singelton' is pretty difficult at the moment (since we don't have the ability to add code to the ABL class loader to automatically populate objects with their dependences after instantiation and passing everything around everywhere isn't always realistic) but limiting your self to Ccs.Common.Application whenever you can is probably a good idea.
Continue reading...
Continue reading...