Few weeks ago, I switched from Java to C#. Today, I had a weird behavior and I try to reproduce it in this simple sample. I'm using a .net FW 4.
I have three classes: First, the abstract one:
namespace ReadonlyStaticOrder
{
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
public abstract class AbstractClass
{
public AbstractClass(string value, IEnumerable<string> someValues)
{
if (value == null)
{
throw new ArgumentNullException("value");
}
if (someValues == null)
{
throw new ArgumentNullException("someValues");
}
// would do something after...
}
}
}
The second one :
namespace ReadonlyStaticOrder
{
using System.Collections.Generic;
public sealed class ReadonlyOrderInitialization : AbstractClass
{
// this line introduces the bug, since it call the ctor before SomeValues already initialized
// if removed, no more exception
public static readonly ReadonlyOrderInitialization Sample = new ReadonlyOrderInitialization("sample");
private static readonly IEnumerable<string> SomeValues = new string[] { "one", "two", "three" };
public ReadonlyOrderInitialization(string value)
: base(value, SomeValues)
{
}
}
}
And the demonstrator:
namespace ReadonlyStaticOrder
{
using System;
public sealed class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
try
{
new ReadonlyOrderInitialization("test");
}
catch (TypeInitializationException typeInitializationException)
{
Console.WriteLine(typeInitializationException.Message);
Console.WriteLine(typeInitializationException.InnerException.Message);
Console.WriteLine(typeInitializationException.StackTrace);
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
}
And the output is:
The type initializer for 'ReadonlyStaticOrder.ReadonlyOrderInitialization' threw an exception. Value cannot be null. Parameter name: someValues at ReadonlyStaticOrder.ReadonlyOrderInitialization..ctor(String value)
at ReadonlyStaticOrder.Program.Main(String[] args) in d:\stackoverflow\static readonlyissue\ConsoleApplication1\ReadonlyStaticOrder\Program.cs:line 12
I added a comment on the line which introduces the bug. For me, the compiler would have to warn me that the behavior can be weird because of the order of static initialization. Am I wrong?
Thank you guys and I hope you have enough information.
