Some design problem with classes

[warlord902]

Suppose I have four classes in a package named T namely Main, A, B and C
The class Main contains public methods which the classes outside package T access and Main class in turn communicate with other three classes and let some function to happen.

Now I want only a single instance of A, B and C to work in this program, means all are once initialized in class Main and that instances all three classes A,B, and C and used by them.

Previously I created static methods in Main class which returns the required instance of A,B and C to the calling class(A,B,C) but it is creating problems, as I want to that once user stops the function of this package and when he starts it again then the initialization of A,B and C and all fields inside it happens again. Means just like from the beginning.

Any way around for this?

[JamesCherrill]

A class with exactly one instance is called a "singleton" class. It is a common pattern in Java applications. Here's a typical implementation:
http://www.javabeginner.com/learn-java/java-singleton-design-pattern

I don't understand what you mean by "user stops the function of this package and when he starts it again then the initialization of A,B and C and all fields inside it happens again". Is there another way you can explain that? Maybe you can post your static methods that return the singletons (one will do, presumambly they are all the same).

[warlord902]

Problem with static singleton approach is that once initialized you are bound to use that same instance of that class. But I want to use new instance when I am finished using one round of operation.

I mean to ask, suppose my package T provides a connection to a server and performs some tasks with the help of all classes within it. And when user finishes his work over that server and wants to connect to a new one, then I want the execution of the same process to start again from the class Main and again the new instances of A, B and C should be created with newly assigned arguments.

Presently I'm using Static singleton approach but it is working good only for one round of operation, means only with a one server, when it tries to connect to a new server then problem occurs, because static fields can't be initialized again.

[Ezzaral]

So simply provide instance methods on Main that return reference to A,B, and C. Let the instance of Main decide how to handle them internally. There isn't any need to make them static.

[warlord902]

So simply provide instance methods on Main that return reference to A,B, and C. Let the instance of Main decide how to handle them internally. There isn't any need to make them static.

For that i need to make static methods in Main which return the instances of A, B and C which means I also need to make those instances static as well. Problem remains the same.

[Ezzaral]

Why do you think they need to be static?

[warlord902]

uhhhh....tell me one thing before, if have something like below:

class A{
  static B;

  A(){
      B=new B();    //Will this initialization occurs once when A1 is created or also
                    //happens when A2 is created
  }
}
class Main{
   public static void main(String[] args){
      A1 = new A();
      A2 = new A();
   }
}

If I execute this, will the initialization of B occurs only once till the program is running or it happens twice?

[Ezzaral]

It will change B every time an instance of A is created. Static is not the same as final.

Static merely means that all instances of a class share that reference instead of each having their own instance variable for it.

[warlord902]

but I had read somewhere that static fields get initialized only once? isn't it true?

[Ezzaral]

They are initialized once, but can be re-assigned. "Final" variables cannot be re-assigned after they are initialized.

[warlord902]

Ya, I also got it now. I was getting confused previously with the growing complexity of my project. Now also I'm changing some design to make it extensible for concurrent sessions if required, so pulling out all static fields now.

Anyways, thanks your time, you got me some ideas to think about.