Question

class AA
{
    public:
        AA ();
        static void a1          ();
        static std :: string b1 ();
        static std :: string c1 (unsigned short x);
};

My class won’t have different objects interacting with among themselves or with others.
Of course I need to have at least one object to call the functions of this class, so I thought of making the members static so that unnecessary object creation can be avoided.

What are the pros and cons of this design? What will be a better design?

Answer 1

Should members of a class be turned static when more than one object creation is not needed?

You make members of the class static when you need only one instance of the member for all objects of your class. When you declare a class member static the member becomes per class instead of per object.

When you say you need only one object of your class, You are probably pointing towards the singleton design pattern. Note that pattern is widely considered an anti pattern and its usefulness if any is dependent to specific situations.

The reason you mention in Q is no way related to whether you should make a member static or not.