Re: [PEPr] +1 for Event::Dispatcher
| From: | Bertrand Mansion | Date: | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:25:06 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [PEPr] +1 for Event::Dispatcher | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-35516@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Arnaud Limbourg wrote:
>
>Arnaud Limbourg (http://pear.php.net/user/arnaud) has voted +1 on the proposal
>for Event::Dispatcher.
>
>Proposal information:
>http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=186
>Vote information:
>http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-vote-show.php?id=186&handle=arnaud
>
>Comment:
>
>This package implements getInstance(), most other packages chose to name
>it singleton().
>
>Would it make sense to name it singleton() as well ?
AFAIK, we never settled on this. There is a little difference here because
getInstance() is able to return more than only one "singleton", thanks to the
parameter it takes. I usually use singleton() but to make a difference I
prefered to use getInstance() this time. getInstance() seemed to express clearer
that you wouldn't get only one singleton.
Bertrand