C# Private Const vs Private Readonly – Key Differences Explained

c++constantsreadonly

Is there a difference between having a private const variable or a private static readonly variable in C# (other than having to assign the const a compile-time expression)?

Since they are both private, there is no linking with other libraries. So would it make any difference? Can it make a performance difference for example? Interned strings? Anything similar?

Best Answer

Well, you can use consts in attributes, since they exist as compile time. You can't predict the value of a static readonly variable, since the .cctor could initialize it from configuration etc.

In terms of usage, constants are burnt into the calling code. This means that if you recompile a library dll to change a public constant, but don't change the consumers, then he consumers will still use the original value. With a readonly variable this won't happen. The flip of this is that constants are (very, very slightly) quicker, since it simply loads the value (rather than having to de-reference it).

Re interning; although you can do this manually, this is most commonly a compiler/runtime feature of literals; if you init a readonly field via a literal:

someField = "abc";

then the "abc" will be interned. If you read it from config, it won't be. Because a constant string must be a literal, it will also be interned, but it is accessed differently: again, reading from the field is a de-reference, rather than a ldstr.

Related Solutions

C# Constants – Difference Between const and readonly in C#

Apart from the apparent difference of

having to declare the value at the time of a definition for a const VS readonly values can be computed dynamically but need to be assigned before the constructor exits. After that it is frozen.
const's are implicitly static. You use a ClassName.ConstantName notation to access them.

There is a subtle difference. Consider a class defined in AssemblyA.

public class Const_V_Readonly
{
  public const int I_CONST_VALUE = 2;
  public readonly int I_RO_VALUE;
  public Const_V_Readonly()
  {
     I_RO_VALUE = 3;
  }
}

AssemblyB references AssemblyA and uses these values in code. When this is compiled:

in the case of the const value, it is like a find-replace. The value 2 is 'baked into' the AssemblyB's IL. This means that if tomorrow I update I_CONST_VALUE to 20, AssemblyB would still have 2 till I recompile it.
in the case of the readonly value, it is like a ref to a memory location. The value is not baked into AssemblyB's IL. This means that if the memory location is updated, AssemblyB gets the new value without recompilation. So if I_RO_VALUE is updated to 30, you only need to build AssemblyA and all clients do not need to be recompiled.

So if you are confident that the value of the constant won't change, use a const.

public const int CM_IN_A_METER = 100;

But if you have a constant that may change (e.g. w.r.t. precision) or when in doubt, use a readonly.

public readonly float PI = 3.14;

Update: Aku needs to get a mention because he pointed this out first. Also I need to plug where I learned this: Effective C# - Bill Wagner

C# – Static Readonly vs. Const

public static readonly fields are a little unusual; public static properties (with only a get) would be more common (perhaps backed by a private static readonly field).

const values are burned directly into the call-site; this is double edged:

it is useless if the value is fetched at runtime, perhaps from config
if you change the value of a const, you need to rebuild all the clients
but it can be faster, as it avoids a method call...
...which might sometimes have been inlined by the JIT anyway

If the value will never change, then const is fine - Zero etc make reasonable consts ;p Other than that, static properties are more common.

Best Answer

Related Solutions

C# Constants – Difference Between const and readonly in C#

C# – Static Readonly vs. Const

Related Question