Suggest an editImprove this articleRefine the answer for “Why is Singleton often called an "anti-pattern"?”. Your changes go to moderation before they’re published.Approval requiredContentWhat you’re changing🇺🇸EN🇺🇦UAPreviewTitle (EN)Short answer (EN)**Singleton** is often considered an **anti-pattern** because of its side effects on scalability and testing: it creates global state, makes testing harder, violates the single responsibility principle, and creates hidden dependencies. **Key point:** Singleton is useful for limited tasks (such as loggers), but overusing it leads to implicit dependencies, hard testing, and a fragile architecture.Shown above the full answer for quick recall.Answer (EN)Image**Singleton** is often considered an **anti-pattern** because of its side effects on scalability and testing: ### Global state Singleton turns into a "hidden global variable." This makes it hard to track who changes the object's state and where. It breaks the isolation of components. ### Testing difficulties It is hard to replace with mocks because the instance is fixed. In unit tests you have to reset the state manually or use reflection. ### Violation of the single responsibility principle The class solves a business task and manages its own lifecycle at the same time, which complicates the architecture. ### Hidden dependencies Code that uses Singleton becomes implicitly dependent on it, which hurts readability and reuse. **Conclusion:** Singleton is useful for limited tasks (such as loggers), but overusing it leads to **implicit dependencies, hard testing, and a fragile architecture**.For the reviewerNote to the moderator (optional)Visible only to the moderator. Helps review go faster.