static-members

I'm trying to register a bunch of classes with a factory at load time. My strategy is to harness static initialization to make sure that before main() begins, the factory is ready to go. This strategy seems to work when I link my library dynamically, but not when I link statically; when I link statically, only some of my static data members get initialized. Let's say my factory builds Cars. I have CarCreator classes that can instantiate a handful of cars, but not all. I want the factory to collect all of these CarCreator classes so that code looking for a new Car can go to the factory without

Consider this example code: public class A<T> { public static T TheT { get; set; } } public class B : A<string> { static B() { TheT = "Test"; } } public class Program { public static void Main(String[] args) { Console.WriteLine(B.TheT); } } Here B.TheT is null. However, changing the Main method like this: public static void Main() { new B(); Console.WriteLine(B.TheT); } B.TheT is "Test", as expected. I can understand that this forces the static constructor to run, but why does this not happen for the first case? I tried reading the spec, and this caught my attention (§10.12): [...] The

I am trying to access a static member from a non-static function in the class, and I get an error saying Static member cannot be accessed off an instance variable this is how my code looks - class myClass { public static testStatic: number = 0; public increment(): void { this.testStatic++; } } From what I understand of static members/methods, we shouldn't access non-static members in static functions, but vice-versa should be possible. the static member is already created and is valid, so why can't I access from my non-static method? Access static members from inside the class the same way you

I was inspired by the comments under this question . I didn't see any reason why a class with only static functions would be a better design than a namespace (with just functions). Any list of pros and cons of these two approaches are welcomed. It would be great with some practical examples! One non-stylistic difference is that you can use a class as a template parameter, but you cannot use a namespace. This is sometimes used for policy classes, like std::char_traits . Outside of that use case, I would stick to a namespace with regular functions. Classes with static methods You can have class

I've got the following class: public static class Pages { public static string LoggedOut = "LoggedOut.aspx"; public static string Login = "Login.aspx"; public static string Home = "Home.aspx"; } I know I can use Pages.Home statically, but there is a reason for my question. I wish to have a method that I can call like this: string pageName = Pages.GetPage("Home"); etc. C'est possible? Thanks, Dave You can use the following: var field = typeof(Pages).GetField("Home", BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Static); var value = (string)field.GetValue(null); You can do it like Konrad suggested using

Static class members in C++ have caused a little confusion for me due to the standard's verbiage: 9.4.2 Static data members [class.static.data] The declaration of a static data member in its class definition is not a definition... However a constexpr is required to be initialized (AFAIK, couldn't find a quote from the standard) at its declaration (e.g., in the class definition). Because of the restrictions on constexpr I had actually forgotten about the requisite for static members to be defined outside of the class, until I tried accessing a static constexpr array. This related question

Let we have two members equal by signature, but one is static and another - is not: class Foo { public void Test() { Console.WriteLine("instance"); } public static void Test() { Console.WriteLine("static"); } } but such code generate brings a compiler error: Type 'Foo' already defines a member called 'Test' with the same parameter types But why? Let we compiled that successfully, then: Foo.Test() should output "static" new Foo().Test(); should output "instance" Can't call the static member instead of instance one because in this case another, more reasonable compiler error will occur: Member

I have a c++ class with an enum inside, and I wanted to mimick that with boost::python , so that I can write MyClass.value in python. boost::python::class_ does not have an enum_ method, and I was looking for workarounds. I first tried with lambdas like MyClass{ enum{value1,value2}; }; class_<MyClass>("MyClass").add_property("value1",&[](){return value1;}).staticmethod("value1"); which gives compiler error (in get_signature for add_property ). I know I could create getter method for each of the values, but that seems very awkward to me (typing-wise). Using attr : auto classObj=class_<MyClass>(