我的单例访问方法通常是一些变种:
static MyClass *gInstance = NULL;
+ (MyClass *)instance
{
@synchronized(self)
{
if (gInstance == NULL)
gInstance = [[self alloc] init];
}
return(gInstance);
}
我能做些什么来改善这一点呢?
我的单例访问方法通常是一些变种:
static MyClass *gInstance = NULL;
+ (MyClass *)instance
{
@synchronized(self)
{
if (gInstance == NULL)
gInstance = [[self alloc] init];
}
return(gInstance);
}
我能做些什么来改善这一点呢?
当前回答
我在sharedInstance上有一个有趣的变化,它是线程安全的,但在初始化后不锁定。我还不确定是否可以按照要求修改顶部的答案,但我将其提出以供进一步讨论:
// Volatile to make sure we are not foiled by CPU caches
static volatile ALBackendRequestManager *sharedInstance;
// There's no need to call this directly, as method swizzling in sharedInstance
// means this will get called after the singleton is initialized.
+ (MySingleton *)simpleSharedInstance
{
return (MySingleton *)sharedInstance;
}
+ (MySingleton*)sharedInstance
{
@synchronized(self)
{
if (sharedInstance == nil)
{
sharedInstance = [[MySingleton alloc] init];
// Replace expensive thread-safe method
// with the simpler one that just returns the allocated instance.
SEL origSel = @selector(sharedInstance);
SEL newSel = @selector(simpleSharedInstance);
Method origMethod = class_getClassMethod(self, origSel);
Method newMethod = class_getClassMethod(self, newSel);
method_exchangeImplementations(origMethod, newMethod);
}
}
return (MySingleton *)sharedInstance;
}
其他回答
关于Objective-C中单例模式的深入讨论,请看这里:
在Objective-C中使用单例模式
我在sharedInstance上有一个有趣的变化,它是线程安全的,但在初始化后不锁定。我还不确定是否可以按照要求修改顶部的答案,但我将其提出以供进一步讨论:
// Volatile to make sure we are not foiled by CPU caches
static volatile ALBackendRequestManager *sharedInstance;
// There's no need to call this directly, as method swizzling in sharedInstance
// means this will get called after the singleton is initialized.
+ (MySingleton *)simpleSharedInstance
{
return (MySingleton *)sharedInstance;
}
+ (MySingleton*)sharedInstance
{
@synchronized(self)
{
if (sharedInstance == nil)
{
sharedInstance = [[MySingleton alloc] init];
// Replace expensive thread-safe method
// with the simpler one that just returns the allocated instance.
SEL origSel = @selector(sharedInstance);
SEL newSel = @selector(simpleSharedInstance);
Method origMethod = class_getClassMethod(self, origSel);
Method newMethod = class_getClassMethod(self, newSel);
method_exchangeImplementations(origMethod, newMethod);
}
}
return (MySingleton *)sharedInstance;
}
根据我下面的另一个回答,我认为你应该这样做:
+ (id)sharedFoo
{
static dispatch_once_t once;
static MyFoo *sharedFoo;
dispatch_once(&once, ^ { sharedFoo = [[self alloc] init]; });
return sharedFoo;
}
如何
static MyClass *gInstance = NULL;
+ (MyClass *)instance
{
if (gInstance == NULL) {
@synchronized(self)
{
if (gInstance == NULL)
gInstance = [[self alloc] init];
}
}
return(gInstance);
}
这样就避免了初始化后的同步成本?
公认的答案,虽然它编译,是不正确的。
+ (MySingleton*)sharedInstance
{
@synchronized(self) <-------- self does not exist at class scope
{
if (sharedInstance == nil)
sharedInstance = [[MySingleton alloc] init];
}
return sharedInstance;
}
根据苹果文档:
... 您可以采用类似的方法来同步相关类的类方法,使用class对象而不是self。
即使使用self工作,它不应该,这看起来像一个复制和粘贴错误对我来说。 类工厂方法的正确实现应该是:
+ (MySingleton*)getInstance
{
@synchronized([MySingleton class])
{
if (sharedInstance == nil)
sharedInstance = [[MySingleton alloc] init];
}
return sharedInstance;
}