singleton

You are not required to know how inheritance works (or what the Singleton is) to write runy code.

Remember that Go's strict import/dependency requirements mean you're unlikely to import the package (and trigger the initialization) unless you actually use the singleton.

It's fine to use a singleton, but don't call it from within every class you use it in.

If it's accessed from multiple threads, you have problems whether it's a global, singleton, or passed by reference.

Abstractly, if you somehow need a singleton object, this will be substantially faster if you need it frequently.

If you lazily initialize then you can get other things done before—or while—you're waiting for the singleton constructor to run.

Or, at least an example of when it would be a good idea to use a singleton over some other pattern?

DI containers mean you don't need a singleton but can just create a single instance which lets you scope it and does not mix lifetime duration and object properties.

Believe it or not there are valid uses for a Singleton which, many would agree, include a simple logging class [1].

I thought there was a lot of literature pretty convincingly arguing that singleton is in fact an anti-pattern.

Just wondering what value the singleton provided if you only obtain it once.

If I had an immutable singleton object that was somehow very expensive to initialize, I might consider this approach.

A singleton is basically a global variable and those aren't really important to "shim" in Go.

Depends on what you mean by "singleton".

Usually, the "singleton pattern" is explicitly a technique for doing the latter.

It's funny how you can take an obvious antipattern (global variables) and turn it into a pattern by giving it a cool new name like "Singleton".

Isn't Singleton's really an anti-pattern?