Singleton error 1024

[bitbitbit]

Hi,

I'm trying to implement singleton in my project.

This is my code:

package controller
{
	public class MaterialCheckInController
	{
		private static var instance : MaterialCheckInController;
		
		public  function MaterialCheckInController( enforcer : SingletonEnforcer ) {
		
		}
		
		public static function getInstance() : MaterialCheckInController {
			if (!instance) {
				instance = new MaterialCheckInController( new SingletonEnforcer() );
			}
			return instance;
		}
		
	}

}

class SingletonEnforcer extends AbstractController
{...}

I'm getting the following error:
1024: Overriding a function that is not marked for override. MaterialCheckInController.as /TestApplicatieFlex/src/controller line 1 Flex Problem

[Barna Biro]

Why is the enforcer extending AbstractController? Makes no sense...
I am guessing that you want MaterialCheckInController to extend it instead...

[ASWC]

Your enforcer is out of scope so you need to explicitly reference any class there or import them in that scope:

class SingletonEnforcer extends controller.AbstractController

[Barna Biro]

The problem is that the above doesn't make any sense in the first place The enforcer should normally have absolutely nothing to do with the AbstractController... Most likely that thing is just a mistake and MaterialCheckInController was the one originally intended to extend AbstractController.

[ASWC]

well he put 3 little dots in the enforcer declaration as if he's gonna write code there.

[Barna Biro]

Originally Posted by ASWC

well he put 3 little dots in the enforcer declaration as if he's gonna write code there.

He shouldn't... That's what I am trying to explain...
Even so, the "extend AbstractController" part is completely out of place.

Or maybe someone can explain why would it make sense for a helper class that is supposed to enforce a single instance for the object in matter extend a type that based on it's name at least is more appropriate to be the superclass of the class that we are trying to limit to a single instance. I am not saying that such enforcers should always be empty ( although 99% of the time they are ), but in the above case, things simply make no sense to me.

So why not stop a bad design now than let it possibly cause havoc later on?