"Jason Hise" wrote: [ policies ]
Granted, defining a category like so is a bit more work, but client code can completely ignore policies that it doesn't care about, and reuse useful categories that it has defined for multiple different singleton types.
If the function destroy() would be renamed to ensure_resource_is_freed() or so no "on-double-destroy" policy may be needed. Such name would also give hint about expected result rather than about internal implementation. --------------- About macros: one should keep them out when possible. If the library will (in the future) handle "application-wide-singletons" (a type would be singletonn even if put in static library linked into a DLL that is manually loaded in an EXE) then some macros will be (likely) necessary. /Pavel