🔒 Locked

static const

Started by bctorvik Dec 27, 2001 at 3:02 AM 4 replies 550+ views

Original Post

Dec 27, 2001 at 3:02 AM

When do you initialize static const ints? I have class A { static const int a=0; //this is what I would static const int b=1; //*like* to do ... } The compiler complains about this, though "Thinking in C++" seems to think this code is fine (an otherwise great book, btw). The static is causing problems, but it''s definitely what I want. I could just #define, but it''s the principle of the matter... Anyone know how to do this? Thanks, brett

DrPizza

Dec 27, 2001 at 5:40 AM

If you''re using VC++6, it has a known bug that prevents this. If you search the KB you can find a list of known bugs.

Workarounds including using an enum for the values instead.

bctorvik

Author

bctorvik

Dec 27, 2001 at 5:41 AM

Ah, thanks -- I''ll check it out.

cody

Dec 27, 2001 at 6:48 AM

your header:

class A {
static const int a=0;
static const int b=1;
};

your cpp-file:

const int A::a=0;
const int B::b=1;

(if this doenst work try without const in the cpp file, i dont know exactly)

bctorvik

Author

bctorvik

Dec 27, 2001 at 7:29 AM

The enum-hack worked great. Just did this (to those who might want to know) ..

Class A {
enum { var=100 };

...

}

And var acts like a ''static const'' variable.

donmc

Dec 27, 2001 at 7:28 PM

cody has the right idea:

  

class A
{
   static const int a;
   static const int b;
};

now outside of any objects:

const int A::a = 0;
const int A::b = 1;

a and b are allocated and given values when your program first starts (before any object instantiation).  Both a and b are const and static just as you wanted. :)

cheers,
don

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin

Edited by - donmc on December 27, 2001 8:35:04 PM

Topic Locked

This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.