Hi,
Can anyone tell me why i cant create the following class as 'static':

//Start

using System;

namespace WinAppSQL.windows
{
public static class WinAPI
{
public static int go() { return 1; }
}
}

//End

The compiler refuses! I'm using VS2003 framework 1.1.4322 SP1.

Cheers,
James.

pigeonrandle wrote:
> Hi,
> Can anyone tell me why i cant create the following class as 'static':
>
> //Start
>
> using System;
>
> namespace WinAppSQL.windows
> {
> public static class WinAPI
> {
> public static int go() { return 1; }
> }
> }
>
> //End
>
> The compiler refuses! I'm using VS2003 framework 1.1.4322 SP1.

Because classes can't be marked static?

If you want a class to be non-creatable, give it a private default
constructor:

class ICantBeInstantiated
{
private ICantBeInstantiated()
{ }
}

It's up to you as the class implementer to not create any instances
within the class itself...

--
Larry Lard
(E-Mail Removed)
The address is real, but unread - please reply to the group
For VB and C# questions - tell us which version

That's because you don't have framework 2.0.

http://www.dotnetfun.com/Articles/cs...icClasses.aspx

Cheers,
Me.

pigeonrandle wrote:
> Hi,
> Can anyone tell me why i cant create the following class as 'static':
>
> //Start
>
> using System;
>
> namespace WinAppSQL.windows
> {
> public static class WinAPI
> {
> public static int go() { return 1; }
> }
> }
>
> //End
>
> The compiler refuses! I'm using VS2003 framework 1.1.4322 SP1.
>
> Cheers,
> James.

Static classes only apply to framework 2 and above, not 1.1 I'm afraid.


pigeonrandle wrote:
> Hi,
> Can anyone tell me why i cant create the following class as 'static':
>
> //Start
>
> using System;
>
> namespace WinAppSQL.windows
> {
> public static class WinAPI
> {
> public static int go() { return 1; }
> }
> }
>
> //End
>
> The compiler refuses! I'm using VS2003 framework 1.1.4322 SP1.
>
> Cheers,
> James.

pigeonrandle,

Static class was introduced in .NET 2.0. You can simulate this behavior in
..NET 1.x, but not completely.


--
Stoitcho Goutsev (100)

"pigeonrandle" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi,
> Can anyone tell me why i cant create the following class as 'static':
>
> //Start
>
> using System;
>
> namespace WinAppSQL.windows
> {
> public static class WinAPI
> {
> public static int go() { return 1; }
> }
> }
>
> //End
>
> The compiler refuses! I'm using VS2003 framework 1.1.4322 SP1.
>
> Cheers,
> James.
>

All,
Thankyou for you words of wisdom. I will use a private constructor.

Cheers,
James.

Stoitcho Goutsev (100) wrote:
> pigeonrandle,
>
> Static class was introduced in .NET 2.0. You can simulate this behavior in
> .NET 1.x, but not completely.
>
>
> --
> Stoitcho Goutsev (100)
>
> "pigeonrandle" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Hi,
> > Can anyone tell me why i cant create the following class as 'static':
> >
> > //Start
> >
> > using System;
> >
> > namespace WinAppSQL.windows
> > {
> > public static class WinAPI
> > {
> > public static int go() { return 1; }
> > }
> > }
> >
> > //End
> >
> > The compiler refuses! I'm using VS2003 framework 1.1.4322 SP1.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > James.
> >

Stoitcho Goutsev (100) wrote:
> pigeonrandle,
>
> Static class was introduced in .NET 2.0. You can simulate this behavior in
> .NET 1.x, but not completely.

What else is there to a static class beyond (a) non-instantiability,
and (b) some static methods?

(not being sarcastic - I just don't know)

Thanks,

cdj

I knew that someone will ask this

You cannot declare instance members (inlcuding constructor) for a class
declared as *static* this restriction cannot be enforced in .NET 1.x. This
doesn't affect functionality, but it may help discovering errors at compile
time. That is what I had in mind.


--
Stoitcho Goutsev (100)

"sherifffruitfly" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> Stoitcho Goutsev (100) wrote:
>> pigeonrandle,
>>
>> Static class was introduced in .NET 2.0. You can simulate this behavior
>> in
>> .NET 1.x, but not completely.
>
> What else is there to a static class beyond (a) non-instantiability,
> and (b) some static methods?
>
> (not being sarcastic - I just don't know)
>
> Thanks,
>
> cdj
>

Stoitcho Goutsev (100) wrote:
> I knew that someone will ask this
>
> You cannot declare instance members (inlcuding constructor) for a class
> declared as *static* this restriction cannot be enforced in .NET 1.x. This
> doesn't affect functionality, but it may help discovering errors at compile
> time. That is what I had in mind.

There's slightly more, actually.

In C# 1.1 there's no way of creating a type without an instance
constructor *at all* - if you don't specify one yourself, a default one
will be provided.

A static class not only doesn't allow you to declare an instance
constructor, but the class will not have one, so you can't instantiate
it even with reflection.

Jon

Methods and constructors can be static, not the class itself in 1.1.
You do not need to instantiate the static class to access static
members.

namespace WinAppSQL.windows
{
public class WinAPI
{
static WinAPI()
{
// static constructor login here
}

public static int go() { return 1; }
}
}

pigeonrandle wrote:
> Hi,
> Can anyone tell me why i cant create the following class as 'static':
>
> //Start
>
> using System;
>
> namespace WinAppSQL.windows
> {
> public static class WinAPI
> {
> public static int go() { return 1; }
> }
> }
>
> //End
>
> The compiler refuses! I'm using VS2003 framework 1.1.4322 SP1.
>
> Cheers,
> James.