From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5615 invoked by alias); 18 Mar 2003 00:16:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 5513 invoked by uid 71); 18 Mar 2003 00:16:01 -0000 Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 00:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030318001601.5509.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Wolfgang Bangerth Subject: Re: c++/10112: static data member is not correctly initialized Reply-To: Wolfgang Bangerth X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg01182.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c++/10112; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Wolfgang Bangerth To: giovannibajo@libero.it, , , , Cc: Subject: Re: c++/10112: static data member is not correctly initialized Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 18:15:06 -0600 (CST) I think with this code, A::p1 is statically initialized (being a POD type), while B::a is dynamically initialized (having a user-defined constructor). I think I remember that the standard specifies that static initializers always run before dynamic ones, irrespective of the order in which they appear in the source file. In that case, this would not be a bug. W. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth/