I use it for an object encapsulating command-line parameters when dealing with pluggable modules. The main program doesn't know what the command-line parameters are for modules that get loaded (and doesn't always even know what modules are being loaded). e.g., main loads A, which doesn't need any parameters itself (so why it should take an extra pointer / reference / whatever, I'm not sure - looks like pollution), then loads modules X, Y, and Z. Two of these, say X and Z, need (or accept) parameters, so they call back to the command-line singleton to tell it what parameters to accept, and the at runtime they call back to find out if the user actually has specified any of them.

在很多方面，处理CGI参数的单例方式与你每次查询只使用一个进程类似(其他mod_*方法不这样做，所以这很糟糕——因此这个参数说你不应该在mod_cgi世界中使用单例，以防你移植到mod_perl或其他世界)。

首先，让我们区分一下单对象和单对象。后者是前者的许多可能实现之一。而且单对象的问题与单例的问题是不同的。单对象本身并不坏，有时是做事情的唯一方法。简而言之:

单对象-我只需要程序中对象的一个实例 Singleton -创建一个带有静态字段的类。添加一个返回此字段的静态方法。在第一次调用时惰性地实例化一个字段。总是返回相同的对象。

public class Singleton {
    private static Singleton instance;

    private Singleton() {}

    public static Singleton instance() {
        if (instance == null) {
            instance = new Singleton();
        }
        return instance;
    }
}

如您所见，规范形式的“单例”模式对测试不是很友好。不过，这个问题很容易解决:只要让Singleton实现一个接口。让我们称它为“可测试单例”:)

public class Singleton implements ISingleton {
    private static Singleton instance;

    private Singleton() {}

    public static ISingleton instance() {
        if (instance == null) {
            instance = new Singleton();
        }
        return instance;
    }
}

现在我们可以模拟Singleton了，因为我们通过接口来使用它。其中一项索赔消失了。让我们看看是否可以去掉另一个声明-共享全局状态。

如果我们剥离单例模式，它的核心是惰性初始化:

public static ISingleton instance() {
    if (instance == null) {
        instance = new Singleton();
    }
    return instance;
}

这就是它存在的全部原因。这就是单对象模式。我们把它拿走，放到工厂方法中，例如:

public class SingletonFactory {
    private static ISingleton instance;

    // Knock-knock. Single Object here
    public static ISingleton simpleSingleton() {
        if (instance == null) {
            instance = new Singleton();
        }
        return instance;
    }
}

与我们的可测试单例有什么不同?没有，因为这是单对象模式的本质——不管你是把它实现为单例、工厂方法还是服务定位器。你仍然有一些共享的全局状态。如果从多个线程访问它，这可能会成为一个问题。您将不得不使simpleSingleton()同步并处理所有多线程问题。

再说一遍:无论你选择什么方法，你都必须付出单一对象的代价。使用依赖注入容器只是将复杂性转移到框架，它将不得不处理单对象的固有问题。

回顾:

Most of people who mention Singleton mean Single Object One of the popular ways to implement it is the Singleton pattern It has its flaws that can be mitigated However, the most of Singleton's complexity roots in Single Object's complexity Regardless of how you instantiate your Single Object, it's still there, be it a Service Locator, a Factory Method or something else You can shift the complexity to a DI container which is (hopefully) well-tested Sometimes using the DI container is cumbersome - imagine injecting a LOGGER to every class

只读单例存储一些全局状态(用户语言、帮助文件路径、应用程序路径)是合理的。使用单例控制业务逻辑时要小心——单例几乎总是以多例告终

一个实例可以在Test::Builder中找到，这个类支持几乎所有现代Perl测试模块。Builder单例存储并代理测试流程的状态和历史记录(历史测试结果，计算运行的测试次数)以及测试输出流向等内容。这些都是协调由不同作者编写的多个测试模块以在单个测试脚本中一起工作所必需的。

The history of Test::Builder's singleton is educational. Calling new() always gives you the same object. First, all the data was stored as class variables with nothing in the object itself. This worked until I wanted to test Test::Builder with itself. Then I needed two Test::Builder objects, one setup as a dummy, to capture and test its behavior and output, and one to be the real test object. At that point Test::Builder was refactored into a real object. The singleton object was stored as class data, and new() would always return it. create() was added to make a fresh object and enable testing.

Currently, users are wanting to change some behaviors of Test::Builder in their own module, but leave others alone, while the test history remains in common across all testing modules. What's happening now is the monolithic Test::Builder object is being broken down into smaller pieces (history, output, format...) with a Test::Builder instance collecting them together. Now Test::Builder no longer has to be a singleton. Its components, like history, can be. This pushes the inflexible necessity of a singleton down a level. It gives more flexibility to the user to mix-and-match pieces. The smaller singleton objects can now just store data, with their containing objects deciding how to use it. It even allows a non-Test::Builder class to play along by using the Test::Builder history and output singletons.

似乎在数据的协调和行为的灵活性之间存在着一种推拉关系，这种关系可以通过在共享数据周围使用尽可能少的行为来缓解，以确保数据的完整性。

您可以在实现状态模式时使用单例(以GoF书中所示的方式)。这是因为具体的State类没有自己的状态，而是根据上下文类执行它们的操作。

你也可以让抽象工厂成为一个单例。

Singleton类的主要目的是限制创建的实例数量，从而确保对资源的访问控制。

使用单例类不会产生内存空间浪费，因为它限制了实例的创建。因为对象的创建只会发生一次，而不是每次新请求时都创建。

单例类在内部使用互斥量，因此使其线程安全。这就是为什么多线程和数据库应用程序主要使用Java中的Singleton模式进行缓存、日志记录、线程池、配置设置等等