What does “static” mean in C?

Question

I\'ve seen the word static used in different places in C code; is this like a static function/class in C# (where the implementation is shared across objects)?

Answer 1

Multi-file variable scope example

Here I illustrate how static affects the scope of function definitions across multiple files.

a.c

#include 

/*
Undefined behavior: already defined in main.
Binutils 2.24 gives an error and refuses to link.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/27667277/why-does-borland-compile-with-multiple-definitions-of-same-object-in-different-c
*/
/*int i = 0;*/

/* Works in GCC as an extension: https://stackoverflow.com/a/3692486/895245 */
/*int i;*/

/* OK: extern. Will use the one in main. */
extern int i;

/* OK: only visible to this file. */
static int si = 0;

void a() {
    i++;
    si++;
    puts("a()");
    printf("i = %d\n", i);
    printf("si = %d\n", si);
    puts("");
}

main.c

#include 

int i = 0;
static int si = 0;

void a();    

void m() {
    i++;
    si++;
    puts("m()");
    printf("i = %d\n", i);
    printf("si = %d\n", si);
    puts("");
}

int main() {
    m();
    m();
    a();
    a();
    return 0;
}

GitHub upstream.

Compile and run:

gcc -c a.c -o a.o
gcc -c main.c -o main.o
gcc -o main main.o a.o

Output:

m()
i = 1
si = 1

m()
i = 2
si = 2

a()
i = 3
si = 1

a()
i = 4
si = 2

Interpretation

• there are two separate variables for si, one for each file
• there is a single shared variable for i

As usual, the smaller the scope, the better, so always declare variables static if you can.

In C programming, files are often used to represent "classes", and static variables represent private static members of the class.

What standards say about it

C99 N1256 draft 6.7.1 "Storage-class specifiers" says that static is a "storage-class specifier".

6.2.2/3 "Linkages of identifiers" says static implies internal linkage:

If the declaration of a file scope identifier for an object or a function contains the storage-class specifier static, the identifier has internal linkage.

and 6.2.2/2 says that internal linkage behaves like in our example:

In the set of translation units and libraries that constitutes an entire program, each declaration of a particular identifier with external linkage denotes the same object or function. Within one translation unit, each declaration of an identifier with internal linkage denotes the same object or function.

where "translation unit is a source file after preprocessing.

How GCC implements it for ELF (Linux)?

With the STB_LOCAL binding.

If we compile:

int i = 0;
static int si = 0;

and disassemble the symbol table with:

readelf -s main.o

the output contains:

Num:    Value          Size Type    Bind   Vis      Ndx Name
  5: 0000000000000004     4 OBJECT  LOCAL  DEFAULT    4 si
 10: 0000000000000000     4 OBJECT  GLOBAL DEFAULT    4 i

so the binding is the only significant difference between them. Value is just their offset into the .bss section, so we expect it to differ.

STB_LOCAL is documented on the ELF spec at http://www.sco.com/developers/gabi/2003-12-17/ch4.symtab.html:

STB_LOCAL Local symbols are not visible outside the object file containing their definition. Local symbols of the same name may exist in multiple files without interfering with each other

which makes it a perfect choice to represent static.

Variables without static are STB_GLOBAL, and the spec says:

When the link editor combines several relocatable object files, it does not allow multiple definitions of STB_GLOBAL symbols with the same name.

which is coherent with the link errors on multiple non static definitions.

If we crank up the optimization with -O3, the si symbol is removed entirely from the symbol table: it cannot be used from outside anyways. TODO why keep static variables on the symbol table at all when there is no optimization? Can they be used for anything? Maybe for debugging.

See also

• analogous for static functions: https://stackoverflow.com/a/30319812/895245
• compare static with extern, which does "the opposite": How do I use extern to share variables between source files?

C++ anonymous namespaces

In C++, you might want to use anonymous namespaces instead of static, which achieves a similar effect, but further hides type definitions: Unnamed/anonymous namespaces vs. static functions