• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
noatom

My singleton class is not so singleton

10 posts in this topic

Here it is:

	class PhysicsModule{

		int AAA;

	private:
		PhysicsModule() {};
		PhysicsModule(PhysicsModule const&) {};
		void operator=(PhysicsModule const&) {};
	public:

		static PhysicsModule* getInstance(){
			static PhysicsModule instance;
			return &instance;
		}

		bool Initialize() {AAA = 12;return true;}
		

	};

So,the problem is,if I call PhysicsModule::getInstance()->Initialize(); it should initialize AAA  to 12 for the singleton.

 

But if after that I do:

PhysicsModule* test = PhysicsModule::getInstance();

 

The AAA pointed to by test won't be 12,it will be 0!

 

Some help?

 

f57.jpg

Edited by noatom
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure you entered the right code? I copy/pasted that, added public in front of AAA, added return true to Init(), and put the two lines of code in main() and printed out the value of AAA in the second access, and it's 12.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How are you checking the value of AAA afterwards? I note that it's private and not exposed through any methods, so presumably you are using the debugger to view the value?

Is it possible then that your debugger is showing you the value of a similarly named local variable instead?

Even if not, debuggers are known to get it wrong sometimes.

 

I recommend fixing the mistake richardurich noted, and then posting a full example that can be compiled. Of course if you solve the problem in the process then that's all good too.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Em...I tested it with a: if aaa == 12,print something,and it turns out it's not equal to 12

 

I use __declspec(dllexport) since I have my class in a dll,so I can use the functions outside the dll,could that cause any problem?

 

And the code is pretty much what I showed in the first post,nothing else.

Edited by noatom
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Em...I tested it with a: if aaa == 12,print something,and it turns out it's not equal to 12

 

I use __declspec(dllexport) since I have my class in a dll,so I can use the functions outside the dll,could that cause any problem?

 

And the code is pretty much what I showed in the first post,nothing else.

 

Well the code you posted works, and there must be more as you are calling getInstance() and testing the value and so on. Your posted code is fine, we need more information.

 

This is a bad idea in any case though, making a phyiscs subsystem a singleton. Yes, you only need one but what you really don't want is uncontrolled access to the physics subsystem across your entire codebase. Just make it an instance and pass it around.

Edited by Aardvajk
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must have something to do with __declspec(dllexport)

 

I normally call Initialize() from an app that uses the dll,and later try to access the AAA IN THE dll,that's when I get AAA=0;

BUT,if I try to access AAA in the app,I get AAA = 12

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must have something to do with __declspec(dllexport)

 

I normally call Initialize() from an app that uses the dll,and later try to access the AAA IN THE dll,that's when I get AAA=0;

BUT,if I try to access AAA in the app,I get AAA = 12

 

Makes more sense. Someone with more expertise about all this can confirm, but I assume that because the method is inline (i.e. defined in the class header) the static member is created in both the app and the DLL. You need to be careful using static in inline methods across a DLL boundary. Move the definition of the method into the .cpp and it should be fine.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,that was the problem. I don't usually define functions in headers...but this time I did,and look what happened!

 

Thanks a lot

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes more sense. Someone with more expertise about all this can confirm, but I assume that because the method is inline (i.e. defined in the class header) the static member is created in both the app and the DLL. You need to be careful using static in inline methods across a DLL boundary. Move the definition of the method into the .cpp and it should be fine.


Sounds right. Each translation unit is compiled separately - including all code in header files copied into that TU by the preprocessor - and has code generated for it. The linker then deals with removing any duplicated definitions from all the TUs so there's only one copy of each definition in the final binaries. Link-time code generation changes up that story a little but the end result is still that by the end of the compile-time linker stage there is only a single copy of each definition (assuming you don't do something illegal to violate the ODR rule). The linker doesn't get to do its job between DLL/EXE boundaries since the code is already generated long before the DLL is loaded. Hence there's two copies of the definition between the two modules. Assuming nothing funny is going on and each TU is linked into only a single binary, moving definitions out of shared headers resolves the linking issues.
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0