Menu
I've been working in C for the past couple of years and I've managed to get use to putting single-purpose, static variables near where they are used within my code.
While writing a very basic method that was in need of a method-scope static value, I was a bit surprised to find that the compiler didn't like that I tried to define a static object from within my method.
Googling has verified that this isn't possible within C#. Still, I'm curious why code, like the following, is completely off limits.
public int incrementCounterAndReturn()
{
static int i = 0;
return ++i;
}
Granted, this is a simplistic example that could be redefined for the same affect but that's beside the point. Method-scope, static values have their place and purpose. What design decisions have prevented such an implementation of static objects within C#?
We're on C# version 5.0 and it's 2013. I can only assume this isn't possible because of a design choice and not just because "that's complex and hard stuff to implement." Does anyone have any insider information?
760
Static is a keyword used in C programming language. It can be used with both variables and functions, i.e., we can declare a static variable and static function as well. An ordinary variable is limited to the scope in which it is defined, while the scope of the static variable is throughout the program.
You can't declare a static variable inside a method, static means that it's a variable/method of a class, it belongs to the whole class but not to one of its certain objects. This means that static keyword can be used only in a 'class scope' i.e. it doesn't have any sense inside methods.
Static variables are generally considered bad because they represent global state and are therefore much more difficult to reason about. In particular, they break the assumptions of object-oriented programming.
Static variablesWhen a variable is declared as static, then a single copy of the variable is created and shared among all objects at the class level. Static variables are, essentially, global variables. All instances of the class share the same static variable.
The language design team is not required to provide a reason to not implement a feature. Rather, the person who wants the feature is required to make the case that the feature is the best possible way the design, implementation, test, and education teams can be spending their budgets. No one has ever successfully done so for your proposed feature.
Were I still on the design team and had this feature pitched I would point out that it is completely unnecessary. The feature in C is a known cause of developer confusion, particularly for novices, and the benefit of local vs type scope is tiny.
101
The underlying runtime does not provide method level static variables. In the CLR, all "static" data is defined on the type level, not method level. C# decided to not add this at the language level in its language design.
This is purely a design choice. VB.Net, which compiles to the same IL, does allow this via the Shared keyword in a Function or Sub statement (though it's handled via the compiler "promoting" the variable to a class level static variable).
34
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
