Singleton class with static method

[archana07]

Hi
I am trying to implement singleton class having static method.
my requirement is as below:

A.h
Class A{
Public :
Static A* getInstance();
}

B.cpp
#include A.h
Class B : public class A{
A* A::getInstance()
{
//some code.
Return *A
}
}

D.cpp
#include B.h

A* pter = A::getInstance() // error: 'getInstance' is not a member of 'A'

please tell me what is wrong in this code.

[ninja9578]

That's the least of your problems.

Class, Return, and Static are all lowercase.

Also

return *A

is not allowed, and missing a trailing semi colon.

Both #includes require quotes.

You declare getInstance, but you never implement it.

And please use [ code] tags (without the space)

[monarch_dodra]

Hi
I am trying to implement singleton class having static method.
my requirement is as below:

A.h

class A{
  public :
    static A* getInstance();
};

A.cpp

#include A.h

//Removed the B class

A* A::getInstance()
{
     static A* my_static_single = new A;
     return my_static_single;
}

main.cpp

#include A.h

int main()
{
    A* pter = A::getInstance();
}

please tell me what is wrong in this code.

These are most of the minimal changes required to make your code even compile. Is this what you wanted?

What was class B doing here? Either:
1- You got confused and added it.
2- You are trying to have a virtual static, which is not possible.

Next time, make sure you do an actual copy-paste of your code, because even a single typo can be enough to not get the answer you need.

I wish I could explain my changes more in detail, but that would require more time than I can spare. If you need specific help, ask, and I will take the time.

[quirkyusername]

Not sure if the inheritance will work like this

Class B : public class A{

I've always written it

Class B : public A{

[Lindley]

A* A::getInstance()
{
     static A* my_static_single = new A;
     return my_static_single;
}

If you're going to use the "static initialization" method, which is slightly flawed but usually good enough, then there's no need to get the heap manager involved at all:

A* A::getInstance()
{
     static A my_static_single;
     return &my_static_single;
}

[monarch_dodra]

If you're going to use the "static initialization" method, which is slightly flawed but usually good enough, then there's no need to get the heap manager involved at all:

A* A::getInstance()
{
     static A my_static_single;
     return &my_static_single;
}

Nice. But what would the "non-static initialization" be?

[Lindley]

I called the above the static initialization method because you're relying on the fact that a static local will only be initialized once. The alternative is to explicitly check:

class A{
    static A* instance;
  public :
    static A* getInstance();
};

A* A::instance = NULL;

A* A::getInstance()
{
     if (!instance)
          instance = new A;
     return instance;
}

In particular, when properly mutex protected (not shown), this is slightly more thread-safe than the above. However, as with any singleton, you can make its initialization completely thread-safe simply by calling getInstance() in the main thread before spawning any others.

[archana07]

Last posted code is sample code so it have so many syntax error.
The below code is a psudeo code. Since i can t share my code becasue its a confidential code.
The Code is divided into two folders :
First Folder contains : We call that folder as "Folder 1"

A.h

Class A{
Public :
Static A* getInstance();
}

A.cpp contains nothing because its a non-concrete

B.h

#include A.h
class B : public A
{
  // some code
};

B.cpp

A* A::getInstance(){
    //some code.
    Return *A
}

In other folder : We call that folder as "Folder 2"

D.h

#include B.h
class D
{
	public : 

		void Initialize();
}

D.cpp

#include D.h

D::Initialize(){

	A* pter = A::getInstance() // error: 'getInstance' is not a member of 'A'
}

I am trying to build the code on CentOs.
As per my requirement I will build the Folder 2 first and then Folder 1...

[monarch_dodra]

Last posted code is sample code so it have so many syntax error.
The below code is a psudeo code. Since i can t share my code becasue its a confidential code.

You are asking us to help you fix a C++ error, and providing pseudo code, how do you expect us to help?

AFAIK, without the syntax errors, and provided the includes resolve, your code should work. I still don't see the point of B. I don't understand your Folder1/Folder2 story. My guess is that your includes are not resolving correctly.

[itsmeandnobodyelse]

Last posted code is sample code so it have so many syntax error.
The below code is a psudeo code. Since i can t share my code becasue its a confidential code.
The Code is divided into two folders :
First Folder contains : We call that folder as "Folder 1"
...

To add to above comment:

The

error: 'getInstance' is not a member of 'A'

most probably is because you have a different case somewhere in the definition of class A. Or you commented getInstance in class because of the syntax errors.

It makes absolutely no sense to present pseudocode with C++ syntax but wrong case letters or missing semicolons.

[D_Drmmr]

Last posted code is sample code so it have so many syntax error.
The below code is a psudeo code. Since i can t share my code becasue its a confidential code.

You don't have to post your original code, just post a minimal example that replicates the problem (but be sure to post all the code of the example). The code you posted so far, contains too much useless things. To make a singleton you need exactly one class, you have more than one.