yes, a very old post and still interresting. just so i get this right, is there any noticeable difference to this plain java variant:

class Foo{
… instance methods …
}

class MyApplicationThings{
public final static FOO1 = new Foo();
public final static FOO2 = new Foo();
}

is there any functional difference?
(and please don’t get into an argument about aesthetics, a library-less solution with fewer lines of code simply wins).

(p.s. i’m putting aside the fact here that i’ve never ever had the need for having multiple instances of a singleton; and another note to that note: having multiple singletons makes my oxymoron-alarm go off, loudly).

public class InjectedTag extends SimpleTagSupport {
//In order to hold the injected service, we have to declare it as static
private static AService _service;
/***/
@Override
public void doTag() throws IOException {
getJspContext().getOut().
write(“Service injected: ” + _service + “”);
}
public void setService(AService service) {
_service = service;
}
}

In you applicationcontext, you have to register both so that the JSP tag can get one chance to be initiated by Spring. We we Go with the magic…

Cool huh, now aService is visible in our JSP tag

Works for me.

http://www.adobocode.com/spring/springs-scopes-singleton-vs-prototype

http://www.adobocode.com/spring/springs-scopes-singleton-vs-prototype

Thanks! After some tinkering which was caused by some
careless configuration your solution seems to work like a charm!

A bit of code on the service class to help some needy soul..

The service class (implemenation of PersonDAO interface)

public class SimplePersonManager implements PersonManager
{
private PersonDAO personDAO;

private PersonManager proxiedSelf;

public void setProxiedSelf(PersonManager proxSelf)
{
this.proxiedSelf = proxSelf;
}

Thanks again and keep up the great work!