Static classes vs singleton

Question

0.00/5 (No votes)

See more:

When we can do the same thing using static classes, why do we need singleton?

I researched a lot but couldn't understand the basic difference. Can somebody explain me in simple words with examples.

Thanks
Dinesh

What I have tried:

google searched but couldnt understand from the explanations

Posted 16-Feb-17 1:01am

Dinesh Kumar Dora

Updated 16-Feb-17 2:53am

Add a Solution

2 solutions

Solution 2

Check past answers to the questions:
Singleton Class Vs Sealed Class Vs Static Class[^]
How can I decide that I should use Static class or singleton class ??[^]
Difference between static class and singleton pattern? - Stack Overflow[^]

Posted 16-Feb-17 2:53am

Maciej Los

Updated 16-Feb-17 2:56am

v2

Comments

Karthik_Mahalingam 16-Feb-17 22:25pm

5

Maciej Los 17-Feb-17 3:21am

Thank you, Karthik.

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

F-ES Sitecore · Accepted Answer · 2017-02-16T01:20:00

Solution 1

Using singletons it is easier to control when the class is initialised to use things like lazy-initialisation etc. Using static classes you're pretty much get what you're given, your class is initialised on creation. Also using sigleton your ultimate class is still an object rather than a static class so has the advantages that come with that, ie it can be used in unit tested easier, use OO features like inheritance, can be passed as an object to other methods, store state etc.

Posted 16-Feb-17 1:20am

F-ES Sitecore

Comments

Nathan Minier 16-Feb-17 7:38am

It might also be worth noting that Singletons infer (though do not guarantee) a certain degree of thread safety, while static classes do not.

F-ES Sitecore 16-Feb-17 8:16am

Not sure I'd agree with that really, either can be made thread safe or not depending on how you code them. The framework guarantees the static constructor will be thread safe, but as for the methods it is down to how you code them, as it would be for singleton too, only with the singleton you are sometimes relying on your own code to ensure thread safe initialisation rather than the guarantees the framework provides.

Nathan Minier 16-Feb-17 8:21am

That's fair, and we can agree to disagree.

If I label anything a singleton, though, I'm going to enforce thread safety on it so downstream developers don't get a nasty surprise. A static item, though? Pure wild west.

F-ES Sitecore 16-Feb-17 8:26am

Um...thread safe static constructors are guaranteed by the .net framework. You think your own code is more reliable than the framework? Maybe you should get a job at Microsoft then :)

Nathan Minier 16-Feb-17 8:27am

Not construction, methods.

F-ES Sitecore 16-Feb-17 8:54am

The methods on your singleton are no different from static ones when it comes to thread safety.

Nathan Minier 16-Feb-17 9:06am

...If I write a class that is meant to function as a singleton, I make sure the methods (and getters/setters) are thread safe so that downstream users can expect consistent operations.

If I write a static class, I don't do this.

This is a fairly common pattern among framework developers, from my experience, hence the addendum I suggested in the first place. If you don't agree, that's fine, but seriously.

F-ES Sitecore 16-Feb-17 9:13am

But if you were writing a static class then you'd do this anyway, wouldn't you? You can't say that static classes are less thread-safe because when you write them *you* don't make them thread-safe. You *should* be making them thread-safe as a static class *has* to be singleton.

Nathan Minier 16-Feb-17 10:28am

Hence the word "infer", based on observation. But whatever, have fun.

Karthik_Mahalingam 16-Feb-17 22:26pm

5