Tcl offers several techniques that can be
used to implement static data in command
procedures.  This page is intended to
present the pros and cons.

----
Example:

Here is a command procedure for a simple
Tcl command that makes use of a "static"
value.  Roughly, it's a constant value
that each invocation of the command will
use without changing, but a value that
need not be created at all if the command
is never evaluated.

  int
  OneObjCommand(ClientData cd, Tcl_Interp *interp,
    int objc, Tcl_Obj *const objv[])
  {
    Tcl_SetObjResult(interp, Tcl_NewIntObj(1));
    return TCL_OK;
  }

  Tcl_CreateObjCommand(interp, "one", OneObjCommand, NULL, NULL);

Note that each time [[one]] is evaluated, a new
'''Tcl_Obj''' is created to hold the value '''1'''.
Since Tcl is capable of managing shared '''Tcl_Obj'''s,
other alternatives are possible that would set
the result to be an additional reference to one shared
'''Tcl_Obj''' rather than a new one each time.
The alternatives differ mostly on where that shared
'''Tcl_Obj''' is stored between calls.

Why might we want an alternative?  Most compelling
reason is memory efficiency.  Consider the script:

  for {set i 0} {$i < 1000000} {incr i} {
    set a($i) [one]
  }

With the implementation of [[one]] above, 1 million
'''Tcl_Obj''' structs have to be allocated.
----
'''Alternative 1: ClientData'''

  int
  OneObjCommand(ClientData cd, Tcl_Interp *interp,
    int objc, Tcl_Obj *const objv[])
  {
    Tcl_SetObjResult(interp, (Tcl_Obj *)cd);
    return TCL_OK;
  }
  void
  OneDelete(ClientData cd)
  {
    Tcl_Obj *objPtr = (Tcl_Obj *)cd;
    Tcl_DecrRefCount(objPtr);
  }

  objPtr = Tcl_NewIntObj(1);
  Tcl_IncrObjCount(objPtr);
  Tcl_CreateObjCommand(interp, "one", OneObjCommand,
    (ClientData)objPtr, OneDelete);

Here the shared '''Tcl_Obj''' with the value '''1'''
is stuffed in the '''ClientData''' of the [[one]] command.
One disadvantage of this alternative is that the
shared '''Tcl_Obj''' is created whether or not [[one]]
is ever called.  For larger amounts of static data, that
might be a waste worth avoiding.  Another possible
disadvantage might be conflict with other uses of the
'''ClientData''' word that a command might have.
----
'''Alternative 2: One field in ClientData'''

  typedef struct OneData {
    Tcl_Obj *one;
  } OneData;
  int
  OneObjCommand(ClientData cd, Tcl_Interp *interp,
    int objc, Tcl_Obj *const objv[])
  {
    OneData *dataPtr = (OneData *)cd;
    if (dataPtr->one == NULL) {
      dataPtr->one = Tcl_NewIntObj(1);
      Tcl_IncrRefCount(dataPtr->one);
    }
    Tcl_SetObjResult(interp, dataPtr->one);
    return TCL_OK;
  }
  void
  OneDelete(ClientData cd)
  {
    OneData *dataPtr = (OneData *)cd;
    if (dataPtr->one != NULL) {
      Tcl_DecrRefCount(dataPtr->one);
    }
    Tcl_Free(dataPtr);
  }

  dataPtr = Tcl_Alloc((int)sizeof(OneData));
  Tcl_CreateObjCommand(interp, "one", OneObjCommand,
    (ClientData)dataPtr, OneDelete);

This is a good choice when the command is already
making use of '''ClientData'''.  

----
'''Alternative 3: Interp AssocData'''

  int
  OneObjCommand(ClientData cd, Tcl_Interp *interp,
    int objc, Tcl_Obj *const objv[])
  {
    Tcl_Obj *objPtr =
        Tcl_GetAssocData(interp, "one", NULL);
    if (objPtr == NULL) {
      objPtr = Tcl_NewIntObj(1);
      Tcl_IncrRefCount(objPtr);
      Tcl_SetAssocData(interp, "one",
          OneAssocDelete, (ClientData)objPtr);
    }
    Tcl_SetObjResult(interp, objPtr);
    return TCL_OK;
  }
  void
  OneAssocDelete(ClientData cd, Tcl_Interp *interp)
  {
    Tcl_Obj *objPtr = (Tcl_Obj *)cd;  
    Tcl_DecrRefCount(objPtr);
  }
  void
  OneDelete(ClientData cd)
  {
    Tcl_Interp *interp = (Tcl_Interp *)cd;
    Tcl_DeleteAssocData(interp, "one");
  }

  Tcl_CreateObjCommand(interp, "one", OneObjCommand,
    (ClientData)interp, OneDelete);

This alternative is best avoided on several grounds.
First, it's vulnerable to a collision in the ''key''
name passed to the '''Tcl_*AssocData''' routines.
Any other code that also wants to store data under
the "one" key of this interp will interfere.  Second,
note that the '''ClientData''' of the command had to
be set in ''interp'' just to enable '''OneDelete'''
to call '''Tcl_DeleteAssocData'''.  This ties up
the '''ClientData''' and is a messy tangle for later
code maintainers to understand.  Third, it's likely
that the performance cost of the '''Tcl_GetAssocData'''
lookup (based on '''TCL_STRING_KEYS''') will be at
least as expensive as the original '''Tcl_NewIntObj'''.

This alternative could be simplified somewhat by dropping
'''OneDelete''' and the command's '''ClientData'''.  The
price would be that the shared value would not be freed
during command deletion, but would hang around until
the entire interp is destroyed.

----
'''[DGP]'''