Private Static C

Private Static C

Home

/
C# / Private and Static Constructors in C#

2022 Copyright Programmingempire . Blossom Feminine | Developed By Blossom Themes . Powered by WordPress . Privacy Policy

This article describes Private and Static Constructors in C#. In general, a class has all of its constructors declared as public. While declaring the constructors of a class as public ensures that we can create its objects, sometimes we don’t require it. In other words, if we need to create a class in such a way that it should not be possible to instantiate it. So, we can do it by making its constructors private. However, still we can use the functionality of that class. In order to do so, we can create a method within the class that returns an instance of it. Also, we must declare that method as static. Because now we can’t have any instance of that class before that static method executes.
In case, a class contains only static methods, we must ensure that its instances should not exist. In this case, we either declare a constructor without an access modifier or explicitly declare the constructor as private. Hence, we can prevent that class to have instances. Since a class containing only static methods doesn’t exhibit a specific behavior. So we can avoid making its objects.
Basically, a static constructor initializes the static fields of a class.
The following program demonstrates the use of private constructors. Since the class FactorialFunctions contains only two static methods, it has a private constructor. Therefore, we can’t instantiate this class. In order to call the methods, we just need the class name and dot operator. Furthermore, the class named MyClass contains a constructor without any access modifier. Also, class A contains a constructor explicitly declared as private.
The following program demonstrates the use of a static constructor. While using a static constructor we must remember certain important points about it. Firstly, when the program executes, the static constructor runs first. Also, the static constructor executes only once. Further, a static constructor can’t take any argument. Therefore it can’t be overloaded. Also, it should not use any access modifier and can’t be inherited either.

Sign up or log in to customize your list.

more stack exchange communities

company blog

Stack Overflow for Teams
– Start collaborating and sharing organizational knowledge.

Create a free Team
Why Teams?

Asked
11 years, 2 months ago

Modified
8 years, 2 months ago

c++ static-methods private-members

5,683 3 3 gold badges 38 38 silver badges 64 64 bronze badges

Highest score (default)

Trending (recent votes count more)

Date modified (newest first)

Date created (oldest first)

289k 40 40 gold badges 382 382 silver badges 606 606 bronze badges

214k 45 45 gold badges 250 250 silver badges 435 435 bronze badges

5,978 4 4 gold badges 23 23 silver badges 32 32 bronze badges

87.4k 18 18 gold badges 112 112 silver badges 206 206 bronze badges

127k 56 56 gold badges 316 316 silver badges 428 428 bronze badges

Stack Overflow

Questions
Help

Products

Teams
Advertising
Collectives
Talent

Company

About
Press
Work Here
Legal
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Contact Us
Cookie Settings
Cookie Policy

Stack Exchange Network

Technology

Culture & recreation

Life & arts

Science

Professional

Business

API

Data

Accept all cookies

Customize settings

Find centralized, trusted content and collaborate around the technologies you use most.
Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.
I was looking at the request parser from the boost::asio example and I was wondering why the private member functions like is_char() are static ? :
It is used in the function consume which is not a static function:
Only member functions can call is_char() and no static member function is calling is_char() . So is there a reason why these functions are static?
Trending sort is based off of the default sorting method — by highest score — but it boosts votes that have happened recently, helping to surface more up-to-date answers.
It falls back to sorting by highest score if no posts are trending.
This function could easily have been made freestanding, since it doesn't require an object of the class to operate within. Making a function a static member of a class rather than a free function gives two advantages:
In this case it appears only the second point applies.
So is there a reason why these functions are static?
Non- static member functions have a hidden additional parameter called this . Passing this doesn't come for free, so making a private function static can be seen as a means of optimization .
But it can also be seen as a means of expressing your requirements/design in your code : If that function doesn't need to refer to any member data of the class, why should it be a non- static member function?
However, changing the type of any member function, public or private , static or not, will require all clients to recompile. If this needs to be done for a private function which those clients can never use, that's a waste of resources. Therefore, I usually move as many functions as possible from the class' private parts into an unnamed namespace in the implementation file .
For this specific example, the choice for a static is_char() is most likely a documentation one. The intent is to impress upon you that the is_char() method is not contrained to a specific instance of the class, but the functionality is specific to the class itself .
In other words, by making it static they are saying that is_char() is a utility function of sorts...one which can be used irrespective of the state of a given instance. By making it private , they are saying that you (as a client) should not try to use it. It either does not do what you think it does, or is implemented in a very constrained, controlled way.
@Mark Ransom's answer brings up a good point for the practical use of a private static member function. Specifically, that member function has access to private and protected members of either a static object or a passed instance of an instantiated object.
One common application of this is to abstract a pthread implementation in somewhat of an object oriented way. Your thread function must be static, but declaring it private limits the accessibility of that function to the class (to all but the most determined). The thread can be passed an instance of the class it's being "hidden" in, and now has access to perform logic using the object's member data.
It's static, since it doesn't require access to any member variables of request_parser objects. Hence, making it static decouples the function since it reduces the amount of state which the function can access.
For what it's worth, it would have been even better if this function wasn't part of the request_parser class at all - instead, it should have been (possibly in a namespace) a free function in the .cpp file.
The point isn't where it is used. The question is what it uses. If its definition doesn't use any nonstatic members, I would make the function static, according to the same principle that I wouldn't pass a redundant parameter to any function (unless they were to be used in overload resulion)
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service , privacy policy and cookie policy

To subscribe to this RSS feed, copy and paste this URL into your RSS reader.

Site design / logo © 2022 Stack Exchange Inc; user contributions licensed under CC BY-SA . rev 2022.9.6.42960

By clicking “Accept all cookies”, you agree Stack Exchange can store cookies on your device and disclose information in accordance with our Cookie Policy .

Sign up or log in to customize your list.

more stack exchange communities

company blog

Stack Overflow for Teams
– Start collaborating and sharing organizational knowledge.

Create a free Team
Why Teams?

Asked
13 years, 11 months ago

Modified
1 year, 5 months ago

61.2k 4 4 gold badges 47 47 silver badges 59 59 bronze badges

18.4k 5 5 gold badges 37 37 silver badges 41 41 bronze badges

Highest score (default)

Trending (recent votes count more)

Date modified (newest first)

Date created (oldest first)

41.5k 12 12 gold badges 77 77 silver badges 109 109 bronze badges

7,053 5 5 gold badges 41 41 silver badges 43 43 bronze badges

9,132 146 146 gold badges 84 84 silver badges 118 118 bronze badges

1,075 7 7 silver badges 11 11 bronze badges

172k 35 35 gold badges 388 388 silver badges 390 390 bronze badges

6,982 8 8 gold badges 37 37 silver badges 41 41 bronze badges

384k 110 110 gold badges 555 555 silver badges 785 785 bronze badges

3,401 13 13 silver badges 30 30 bronze badges

Stack Overflow

Questions
Help

Products

Teams
Advertising
Collectives
Talent

Company

About
Press
Work Here
Legal
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Contact Us
Cookie Settings
Cookie Policy

Stack Exchange Network

Technology

Culture & recreation

Life & arts

Science

Professional

Business

API

Data

Accept all cookies

Customize settings

Find centralized, trusted content and collaborate around the technologies you use most.
Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.
When creating a class that has internal private methods, usually to reduce code duplication, that don't require the use of any instance fields, are there performance or memory advantages to declaring the method as static?
Is there any advantage to declaring the GetInnerXml() methods as static? No opinion responses please, I have an opinion.
Trending sort is based off of the default sorting method — by highest score — but it boosts votes that have happened recently, helping to surface more up-to-date answers.
It falls back to sorting by highest score if no posts are trending.
After you mark the methods as static, the compiler will emit non-virtual call sites to these members. Emitting non-virtual call sites will prevent a check at runtime for each call that ensures that the current object pointer is non-null. This can result in a measurable performance gain for performance-sensitive code. In some cases, the failure to access the current object instance represents a correctness issue.
When I'm writing a class, most methods fall into two categories:
Static methods are useful, because just by looking at its signature, you know that the calling it doesn't use or modify the current instance's state.
If an instance of library's state ever gets screwed up, and I'm trying to figure out why, I can rule out findBook as the culprit, just from its signature.
I try to communicate as much as I can with a method or function's signature, and this is an excellent way to do that.
A call to a static method generates a call instruction in Microsoft intermediate language (MSIL), whereas a call to an instance method generates a callvirt instruction, which also checks for a null object references. However, most of the time the performance difference between the two is not significant.
Yes, the compiler does not need to pass the implicit this pointer to static methods. Even if you don't use it in your instance method, it is still being passed.
It'll be slightly quicker as there is no this parameter passed (although the performance cost of calling the method is probably considerably more than this saving).
I'd say the best reason I can think of for private static methods is that it means you can't accidentally change the object (as there's no this pointer).
This forces you to remember to also declare any class-scoped members the function uses as static as well, which should save the memory of creating those items for each instance.
I very much prefer all private methods to be static unless they really can't be. I would much prefer the following:
over every method accessing the instance field. Why is this? Because as this process of calculating becomes more complex and the class ends up with 15 private helper methods, then I REALLY want to be able to pull them out into a new class that encapsulates a subset of the steps in a semantically meaningful way.
When MyClass gets more dependencies because we need logging and also need to notify a web service (please excuse the cliche examples), then it's really helpful to easily see what methods have which dependencies.
Tools like R# lets you extract a class from a set of private static methods in a few keystrokes. Try doing it when all private helper methods are tightly coupled to the instance field and you'll see it can be quite a headache.
As has already been stated, there are many advantages to static methods. However; keep in mind that they will live on the heap for the life of the application. I recently spent a day tracking down a memory leak in a Windows Service... the leak was caused by private static methods inside a class that implemented IDisposable and was consistently called from a using statement. Each time this class was created, memory was reserved o
Porno Overwatch Futa
Young Boy Masturbate Porno
Led Screens Outdoor

Private Static C

Report Page