这个问题不是为了讨论单例设计模式是否可取、是否是一种反模式,或者是否用于任何宗教战争,而是为了讨论如何以最Python化的方式在Python中最好地实现这种模式。在这个例子中,我定义“最蟒蛇”是指它遵循“最少惊讶的原则”。

我有多个类将成为单类(我的用例是一个记录器,但这并不重要)。当我可以简单地继承或装饰时,我不希望在几个类中添加口香糖。

最佳方法:


方法1:装饰器

def singleton(class_):
    instances = {}
    def getinstance(*args, **kwargs):
        if class_ not in instances:
            instances[class_] = class_(*args, **kwargs)
        return instances[class_]
    return getinstance

@singleton
class MyClass(BaseClass):
    pass

Pros

装饰符的添加方式通常比多重继承更直观。

Cons

虽然使用MyClass()创建的对象将是真正的单例对象,但MyClass本身是一个函数,而不是类,因此不能从中调用类方法x=MyClass();y=MyClass();t=类型(n)();

则x==y但x!=t&y!=吨


方法2:基类

class Singleton(object):
    _instance = None
    def __new__(class_, *args, **kwargs):
        if not isinstance(class_._instance, class_):
            class_._instance = object.__new__(class_, *args, **kwargs)
        return class_._instance

class MyClass(Singleton, BaseClass):
    pass

Pros

这是一门真正的课

Cons

多重继承-嗯__new__是否可以在从第二个基类继承期间被覆盖?一个人必须想得比必要的多。


方法3:元类

class Singleton(type):
    _instances = {}
    def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
        if cls not in cls._instances:
            cls._instances[cls] = super(Singleton, cls).__call__(*args, **kwargs)
        return cls._instances[cls]

#Python2
class MyClass(BaseClass):
    __metaclass__ = Singleton

#Python3
class MyClass(BaseClass, metaclass=Singleton):
    pass

Pros

这是一门真正的课自动神奇地覆盖继承为正确的目的使用__metaclass__(并让我意识到)

Cons

有吗?


方法4:decorator返回同名类

def singleton(class_):
    class class_w(class_):
        _instance = None
        def __new__(class_, *args, **kwargs):
            if class_w._instance is None:
                class_w._instance = super(class_w,
                                    class_).__new__(class_,
                                                    *args,
                                                    **kwargs)
                class_w._instance._sealed = False
            return class_w._instance
        def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
            if self._sealed:
                return
            super(class_w, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)
            self._sealed = True
    class_w.__name__ = class_.__name__
    return class_w

@singleton
class MyClass(BaseClass):
    pass

Pros

这是一门真正的课自动神奇地覆盖继承

Cons

创建每个新类是否没有开销?在这里,我们为每个希望成为单例的类创建两个类。虽然这对我来说很好,但我担心这可能无法扩展。当然,对于这种模式的规模是否太容易,还有争议。。。_seled属性的意义是什么无法使用super()在基类上调用同名方法,因为它们将递归。这意味着您不能自定义__new__,也不能对需要调用__init__的类进行子类化。


方法5:模块

模块文件singleton.py

Pros

简单胜于复杂

Cons

未延迟实例化


当前回答

好吧,除了同意Pythonic关于模块级全局的一般建议之外,这又如何呢

def singleton(class_):
    class class_w(class_):
        _instance = None
        def __new__(class2, *args, **kwargs):
            if class_w._instance is None:
                class_w._instance = super(class_w, class2).__new__(class2, *args, **kwargs)
                class_w._instance._sealed = False
            return class_w._instance
        def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
            if self._sealed:
                return
            super(class_w, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)
            self._sealed = True
    class_w.__name__ = class_.__name__
    return class_w

@singleton
class MyClass(object):
    def __init__(self, text):
        print text
    @classmethod
    def name(class_):
        print class_.__name__

x = MyClass(111)
x.name()
y = MyClass(222)
print id(x) == id(y)

输出为:

111     # the __init__ is called only on the 1st time
MyClass # the __name__ is preserved
True    # this is actually the same instance

其他回答

我将推荐一个使用元类的优雅解决方案

class Singleton(type): 
    # Inherit from "type" in order to gain access to method __call__
    def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
        self.__instance = None # Create a variable to store the object reference
        super().__init__(*args, **kwargs)

    def __call__(self, *args, **kwargs):
        if self.__instance is None:
            # if the object has not already been created
            self.__instance = super().__call__(*args, **kwargs) # Call the __init__ method of the subclass (Spam) and save the reference
            return self.__instance
        else:
            # if object (Spam) reference already exists; return it
            return self.__instance

class Spam(metaclass=Singleton):
    def __init__(self, x):
        print('Creating Spam')
        self.x = x


if __name__ == '__main__':
    spam = Spam(100)
    spam2 = Spam(200)

输出:

Creating Spam

从输出中可以看到,只有一个对象被实例化

我不记得我在哪里找到了这个解决方案,但从我的非Python专家的角度来看,我发现它是最“优雅”的:

class SomeSingleton(dict):
    __instance__ = None
    def __new__(cls, *args,**kwargs):
        if SomeSingleton.__instance__ is None:
            SomeSingleton.__instance__ = dict.__new__(cls)
        return SomeSingleton.__instance__

    def __init__(self):
        pass

    def some_func(self,arg):
        pass

我为什么喜欢这个?没有修饰符,没有元类,没有多重继承。。。如果你决定不再让它成为单身汉,就删除__new__方法。由于我刚接触Python(以及OOP),我希望有人能告诉我为什么这是一种可怕的方法?

看看这个。其思想是通过args和kwargs来散列实例密钥。https://stackoverflow.com/a/73495782/2910384

我更喜欢这个解决方案,我发现它非常清晰和直接。例如,如果其他线程已经创建了它,它将使用双重检查。需要考虑的另一件事是确保反序列化不会创建任何其他实例。https://gist.github.com/werediver/4396488

import threading


# Based on tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.instance() approach.
# See https://github.com/facebook/tornado
class SingletonMixin(object):
    __singleton_lock = threading.Lock()
    __singleton_instance = None

    @classmethod
    def instance(cls):
        if not cls.__singleton_instance:
            with cls.__singleton_lock:
                if not cls.__singleton_instance:
                    cls.__singleton_instance = cls()
        return cls.__singleton_instance


if __name__ == '__main__':
    class A(SingletonMixin):
        pass

    class B(SingletonMixin):
        pass

    a, a2 = A.instance(), A.instance()
    b, b2 = B.instance(), B.instance()

    assert a is a2
    assert b is b2
    assert a is not b

    print('a:  %s\na2: %s' % (a, a2))
    print('b:  %s\nb2: %s' % (b, b2))

这个解决方案在模块级别造成了一些命名空间污染(三个定义而不是一个),但我发现很容易理解。

我希望能够编写这样的东西(惰性初始化),但不幸的是,类在它们自己的定义体中不可用。

# wouldn't it be nice if we could do this?
class Foo(object):
    instance = None

    def __new__(cls):
        if cls.instance is None:
            cls.instance = object()
            cls.instance.__class__ = Foo
        return cls.instance

由于这是不可能的,我们可以在

Eagle初始化:

import random


class FooMaker(object):
    def __init__(self, *args):
        self._count = random.random()
        self._args = args


class Foo(object):
    def __new__(self):
        return foo_instance


foo_instance = FooMaker()
foo_instance.__class__ = Foo

延迟初始化:

Eagle初始化:

import random


class FooMaker(object):
    def __init__(self, *args):
        self._count = random.random()
        self._args = args


class Foo(object):
    def __new__(self):
        global foo_instance
        if foo_instance is None:
            foo_instance = FooMaker()
        return foo_instance


foo_instance = None