Why does .NET save simple types (int,..) in stack?

Question

Possible Duplicate:
Why value-types are stored onto Stacks?

I understand about boxing / unboxing but my question is why .NET make the choice of store ie. an integer in stack ?

Its logical when you are (simple) passing parameters between procs / functions... but... why...is this generallly used in .NET in any case ?

Thanks a lot!

That's not entirely true. Read [this](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/815354/why-are-structs-stored-on-the-stack-while-classes-get-stored-on-the-heap-net/815420#815420) and [this](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ericlippert/archive/2010/09/30/the-truth-about-value-types.aspx). — Oded, Oct 05 '11 at 15:15
Why should .NET choose not to use the stack for a short-lived variable if it is available? — Anthony Pegram, Oct 05 '11 at 15:16
The question is based on a completely false premise. The .NET team did *not* make that decision, and so asking why they did is pointless. Integers are not always stored on the stack. Sometimes they are stored on the stack, sometimes they are stored in registers, and sometimes they are stored on the heap, depending on the lifetime of the storage. — Eric Lippert, Oct 05 '11 at 15:17
Thanks a lot to All and speccially to "Eric Lippert" to take time to answer to a novice :) — boctulus, Oct 05 '11 at 19:53

score 0 · Answer 1 · answered Oct 05 '11 at 15:15

0

Not all integers are in stack.only integers which are local to functions or passed between functions are stored in stack.

If the integer is a part of class(ref type) then the integer is stored on the place where the ref types are stored(managed heap)

answered Oct 05 '11 at 15:15

Ashley John

score 0 · Answer 2 · answered Oct 05 '11 at 15:16

0

Because allocating heap objects for every integer and dereferencing the pointers all the time would be orders of magnitude too slow.

answered Oct 05 '11 at 15:16

Joshua

2 Answers2