current community

your communities

more stack exchange communities

Stack Exchange
tour help
Take the 2-minute tour ×
Code Review Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for peer programmer code reviews. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 9 down vote favorite
4

Is this the correct implementation of a singleton using enum?

public class Item3 {

public static void main(String[] args) {

    Singleton s=Singleton.Single.INSTANCE.getInstance();
    Singleton s2=Singleton.Single.INSTANCE.getInstance();
    System.out.printf("%b",s==s2);
}
}


class Singleton {
    enum Single{
    INSTANCE;
    Singleton s=new Singleton();
    public Singleton getInstance(){
        if(s==null)
            return new Singleton();
        else return s;
    }
    }
}
share|improve this question

3 Answers 3

up vote 17 down vote accepted

No, it is simpler to code than that:

enum Singleton
{
    INSTANCE;

    // instance vars, constructor
    private final Connection connection;

    Singleton()
    {
        // Initialize the connection
        connection = DB.getConnection();
    }

    // Static getter
    public static Singleton getInstance()
    {
        return INSTANCE;
    }

    public Connection getConnection()
    {
        return connection;
    }
}

Then you use can use final Singleton s = Singleton.getInstance(). Note however that since this is an enum you can always access this via Singleton.INSTANCE.

And NEVER do that:

public Singleton getInstance(){
    if(s==null)
        return new Singleton();
    else return s;
}

this is not thread safe! What is more, the new Singleton() value is never assigned to s... (thanks @DaveJarvis for noticing this!)

share|improve this answer
    
thanks. if I need to obtain a Database connection using singleton in this fashion then I would write enum Singleton{ INSTANCE; Connection c=DB.getConnection(); } and use Connection con = Singleton.INSTANCE.c in client code? Please correct me if my understanding is not correct –  Nishant Jun 12 '13 at 10:30
    
See my edit. While you could make the connection available as you say, it is something I would not recommend personally. –  fge Jun 12 '13 at 10:37
    
@fge I know that this will help avoiding multiple objects creation from reflection and deserialization and cloning but will it also avoid creating multiple instances from threading? –  ssc Apr 12 at 15:39
up vote 0 down vote

Your response and other samples in Singleton_pattern 

public enum Singleton {
        INSTANCE;
        public void execute (String arg) {
                //... perform operation here ...
        }
}
share|improve this answer
up vote 0 down vote 
public enum Singleton{
   INSTANCE;
}

This is enough; you can directly use Singleton.INSTANCE to get the instance of the class.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.