Static virtual functions - Reasons

Expand Post »

Is having static virtual functions possible in C++ ?
I know its not as compiler throws an error but I am eager to know why?

the one reason I can think of (please validate)

"Virtual Functions are related to the object i,e calling a right functon on right object where as static functions scope is at the class level. So there is a wide gap between the two concepts hence it is not possible"

I know the reasoning above looks stupid but can you provide some solid grounds to it ?

Similar Threads

Virtual functions in C++
Virtual functions, function objects, or what? in C
C++ derived class virtual functions in C++
performance benefit by not calling static member function by object in C
Dealing w/ virtual functions in C++

ankitrastogi82

Reputation Points: 10

Solved Threads: 0

Newbie Poster

Offline

11 posts
since Aug 2005

Permalink

Jul 16th, 2007

Re: Static virtual functions - Reasons

Polymorphism occurs because of dynamic binding, which is made possible through use of pointers (The compiler internally represents a virtual function as a pointer, whose value is determined at run time) -

however, a static function is just that - its not a function pointer, but an object which has a static address.

If you want to call a derived class static function through a base class pointer, then you can use a non-static virtual function wrapper to achieve the same thing. eg,

CPP Syntax (Toggle Plain Text)
#include <iostream>
 
class Base
{
    static void foo() { std::cout << "Base\n"; }
public:
    virtual void bar() { foo(); }
 
};
 
class Derived : public Base
{
    static void foo() { std::cout << "Derived\n"; }
public:
    virtual void bar() { foo(); }
};
 
int main()
{
    Base* obj = new Derived;
    obj->bar();
    delete obj;
}
#include <iostream>

class Base
{
    static void foo() { std::cout << "Base\n"; }
public:
    virtual void bar() { foo(); }

};

class Derived : public Base
{
    static void foo() { std::cout << "Derived\n"; }
public:
    virtual void bar() { foo(); }
};

int main()
{
    Base* obj = new Derived;
    obj->bar();
    delete obj;
}

Last edited by Bench; Jul 16th, 2007 at 9:20 am.

Bench

Reputation Points: 307

Solved Threads: 62

Posting Pro

Offline

565 posts
since Feb 2006

Permalink

Jul 16th, 2007

Re: Static virtual functions - Reasons

>Is having static virtual functions possible in C++ ?
No.

>I know the reasoning above looks stupid but can you provide some solid grounds to it ?
No, actually your reasoning is precisely what I would use to describe the restriction. The real answer is a little more involved though.

>however, a static function is just that - its not a function
>pointer, but an object which has a static address.
You're probably thinking of the usual way of accessing a static member function:

C++ Syntax (Toggle Plain Text)
MyClass::my_static_function();
MyClass::my_static_function();

Expecting polymorphic behavior in this case is silly unless you use templates for compile-time polymorphism:

C++ Syntax (Toggle Plain Text)
#include <iostream>
 
using namespace std;
 
class Foo {
public:
  static void bar() { cout<<"bar\n"; }
};
 
template <typename T>
void baz()
{
  T::bar();
}
 
int main()
{
  baz<Foo>();
}
#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

class Foo {
public:
  static void bar() { cout<<"bar\n"; }
};

template <typename T>
void baz()
{
  T::bar();
}

int main()
{
  baz<Foo>();
}

But there's nothing in the language definition that prevents adding virtual static member functions. In fact, it would be rather simple to add the feature. The class calling mechanism (MyClass::my_static_function();) would work the same and an extra rule could be added so that obj->my_static_function(); calls the most derived static member function.

virtual static member functions aren't presently supported in C++, but it's not because they're impossible or illogical. It's more likely to be an oversight followed by lack of demand.

Narue

Administrator

Reputation Points: 6442

Solved Threads: 1391

Bad Cop

Offline

11,807 posts
since Sep 2004

This thread is more than three months old

No one has posted to this discussion for at least three months. Please let old threads die and do not reply to them unless you feel you have something new and valuable to contribute that absolutely must be added to make the discussion complete. Otherwise, please start a new thread in this forum instead.

Previous Thread in C++ Forum Timeline: problem with cygcurl-2.dll

Next Thread in C++ Forum Timeline: array error

DaniWeb Message

Cancel Changes

User Name
Password