From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-help-return-16500-listarch-gcc-help=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 15788 invoked by alias); 27 Apr 2004 14:16:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15781 invoked from network); 27 Apr 2004 14:16:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mgr2.xmission.com) (198.60.22.202)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Apr 2004 14:16:32 -0000
Received: from [198.60.22.201] (helo=mgr1.xmission.com)
	by mgr2.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
	id 1BITNw-0004Kg-02; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 08:16:32 -0600
Received: from [198.60.22.20] (helo=xmission.xmission.com)
	by mgr1.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 4.30)
	id 1BITNv-0003gx-SB; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 08:16:31 -0600
Received: from llewelly by xmission.xmission.com with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1BITNv-0007AI-00; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 08:16:31 -0600
To: hartmut.schirmer@arcor.de
Cc: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
References: <27995117.1083053470687.JavaMail.ngmail@webmail05.arcor-online.net>
From: llewelly@xmission.com
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 14:16:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <27995117.1083053470687.JavaMail.ngmail@webmail05.arcor-online.net>
Message-ID: <s3r3c6p8q0w.fsf@xmission.xmission.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/21.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Omit guard on static objects ?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on mgr1.xmission.com
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=8.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no 
	version=2.63
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: llewelly@xmission.com
X-SA-Exim-Version: 3.1 (built Wed Aug 20 09:38:54 PDT 2003)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes
X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00359.txt.bz2

hartmut.schirmer@arcor.de writes:

> Hi,
> 
> is there any way to omit the automatic construction guard
> created in
> 
> int foo()
> {
>   static class A a;
> ...
> }

If you define A so that its constructor and destructor are trivial,
    the gaurd will not be generated, unless there is an initializer
    for a.

Otherwise, the gaurd will always be present.