C# static, is this correct?

[Maya]

Hello guys, in C#, is using "static" would be the most proper way to
get around calling methods located in different classes? for instance,
a method caller in class A wouldn't see a method in class B unless that
method is declared as public static.

This works fine (i guess!) for me, and i have been doing this for a
long time, just came to my mind that there might be a better or more
professional way to call methods in other classes without sharing the
method for the whole namespace scope, and just came to my mind: what if
this practice slows down execution? as i do have intensive calculations
where a method has to return values in few milliseconds and the overall
performance is vital for my application.

Your opinions are greatly appreciated, Thank you!

Maya.

[Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]]

Re: C# static, is this correct?

Maya,

See inline:
[color=blue]
> Hello guys, in C#, is using "static" would be the most proper way to
> get around calling methods located in different classes? for instance,
> a method caller in class A wouldn't see a method in class B unless that
> method is declared as public static.[/color]

Well, a method in class A could call methods on class B that are not
static if it has an instance of class B to call them on. Static allows you
to call methods on the class, not in instances of the class.
[color=blue]
> This works fine (i guess!) for me, and i have been doing this for a
> long time, just came to my mind that there might be a better or more
> professional way to call methods in other classes without sharing the
> method for the whole namespace scope, and just came to my mind: what if
> this practice slows down execution? as i do have intensive calculations
> where a method has to return values in few milliseconds and the overall
> performance is vital for my application.[/color]

I don't see where a static method over an instance method would slow
execution.

Hope this helps.


--
- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]
- mvp@spam.guard. caspershouse.co m
[color=blue]
>
> Your opinions are greatly appreciated, Thank you!
>
> Maya.
>[/color]

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Re: C# static, is this correct?

Maya <kfoury@gmail.c om> wrote:

<snip>

See my response in the .general newsgroup, and read

http://www.pobox.com/~skeet/csharp/faq/posting.html

--
Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Yunus Emre ALPÖZEN [MVP]]

Re: C# static, is this correct?

What about singleton ? Take a look at this..

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...tondespatt.asp

--
HTH

Thanks,
Yunus Emre ALPÖZEN
BSc, MCSD.NET
Microsoft .NET & Security MVP

"Maya" <kfoury@gmail.c om> wrote in message
news:1138122936 .455286.168340@ f14g2000cwb.goo glegroups.com.. .[color=blue]
> Hello guys, in C#, is using "static" would be the most proper way to
> get around calling methods located in different classes? for instance,
> a method caller in class A wouldn't see a method in class B unless that
> method is declared as public static.
>
> This works fine (i guess!) for me, and i have been doing this for a
> long time, just came to my mind that there might be a better or more
> professional way to call methods in other classes without sharing the
> method for the whole namespace scope, and just came to my mind: what if
> this practice slows down execution? as i do have intensive calculations
> where a method has to return values in few milliseconds and the overall
> performance is vital for my application.
>
> Your opinions are greatly appreciated, Thank you!
>
> Maya.
>[/color]

[Dave]

Re: C# static, is this correct?

I would expect static to be faster than creating an instance of an
object. But i don't think by much. I would base my decision on
whether or not you need to create an object or just have access to a
method.

[Vladimir Matveev]

Re: C# static, is this correct?

Singleton has some important differences with simple class with static
methods
1. Singleton class can implenet interfaces
2. Singleton can be passed to other methods as an argument
3. It is easier to control initialization and lifecycle of singleton
object.

[Jeff Louie]

Re: C# static, is this correct?

Dave... Although you can think of instances as having their own methods
and
fields in separate memory, in reality the compiler is able to optimize
this so
that there is only a single copy of methods. Each call to a method gets
a
separate stack frame. Here is the MSIL for a static call to DoIt and a
singleton
call to DoIt():

Static : DoIt : void()

..method private hidebysig static void DoIt() cil managed
{
// Code size 11 (0xb)
.maxstack 1
IL_0000: ldsfld string TestILStatic.Cl ass1::message
IL_0005: call void [mscorlib]System.Console: :WriteLine(stri ng)
IL_000a: ret
} // end of method Class1::DoIt
Here is the Singleton DoIt() IL:

Singleton : DoIt : void()

..method public hidebysig instance void DoIt() cil managed
{
// Code size 12 (0xc)
..maxstack 1
IL_0000: ldarg.0
IL_0001: ldfld string TestILSingleton .Singleton::mes sage
IL_0006: call void [mscorlib]System.Console: :WriteLine(stri ng)
IL_000b: ret
} // end of method Singleton::DoIt
Note the added argument on the stack to this.

Regards,
Jeff[color=blue][color=green]
>>I would expect static to be faster than creating an instance of an[/color][/color]
object<<

*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***