C# coding style question

Lost User

I use both too, but tend to group the statics at the bottom of the class in it's own region.

Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]

Espen Harlinn

I prefer to put visibility first, and for what it's worth, I don't think I would make a static field public.

Espen Harlinn Principal Architect, Software - Goodtech Projects & Services AS Projects promoting programming in "natural language" are intrinsically doomed to fail. Edsger W.Dijkstra

jschell

I prefer the following.

static public...
private static...

I do it that way to make the basic nature of the items more visible to all.

PIEBALDconsult

I'm with Richard Deeming. Additionally, I always specify the access modifier, I never allow a default to apply -- I think the defaults should be removed from the language.

BillWoodruff

I agree with Richard Deeming's response focusing on "consistency." And, I emphatically agree with PIEBALDConsult's response, when he says/implies that one should always specify the scope with Public/Private, and that it would be a good thing for the .NET compiler to "enforce" this. I prefer to use: public/private static variabletype. It's interesting to me that if you write (C#, WinForms) inside the scope of a Form's class definition:

public static bool availableOutsideFormClassScope = true;

That ReSharper 8 will "suggest" that the use of 'public is redundant. But, if you write this:

static bool notAvailableOutsideFormClassScope = true;

, you have, in effect, declared this variable as private. I have never had occasion to use a Form scoped static variable, method, embedded class, etc; I only use static when I want something to be accessible outside a Form's class scope. But, perhaps if I were dealing with multiple instance of the same application, or multi-threading, there would be an "organic" need for this ? When I write applications where there are multiple independent Forms (in WinForms this can be done by modifying the Program.cs file so it calls an initializer method to "run" the application ... and that initializer creates and "shows" all Form instances ... rather than doing the usual: Application.Run(new SomeMainForm()); ... in that circumstance I usually use a ststic class defined as an an application top-level class (i.e., added via VS's Project/Add Class menu). I know there are people who feel an almost "religious zeal" about not using static anything/anywhere, perceiving the use of static whatever as a violation of the No-Globals-Strongly-Typed supreme being, and doomed to provoke the wrath of the Threading sub-deities :) I have yet to have a cause to feel such a conviction. Bill

Google CEO, Erich Schmidt: "I keep asking for a product called Serendipity. This product would have access to everything ever written or recorded, know everything the user ever worked on and saved to his or her personal hard drive, and know a whole lot about the user's tastes, friends and predilections." 2004, USA Today interview

Rakesh Meel

i suggest frist one style.

Ricardo Kajihara

I always like to use the access modifier first.

Christopher Kenis

I'm with Richard Deeming here, I use the first method myself. As Richard said, consistency is the key!

Gary Wheeler

BillWoodruff wrote:

I know there are people who feel an almost "religious zeal" about not using static anything/anywhere, perceiving the use of static whatever as a violation of the No-Globals-Strongly-Typed supreme being

I have a feeling you and I are of a vintage, Bill :). We are grizzled combat veterans of the FORTRAN wars. We remember when men were men, women created compilers[^], and you knew how to handle globals safely.