Timeline for Why can't I initialize non-const static member or static array in class?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30 at 8:35 | answer | added | Bonebumble | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jun 9, 2020 at 16:58 | answer | added | Lewis Kelsey | timeline score: 7 | |
| S Nov 9, 2016 at 16:25 | history | suggested | Ben | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
grammar edits
|
| Nov 9, 2016 at 15:00 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Nov 9, 2016 at 16:25 | |||||
| Jul 24, 2015 at 10:26 | answer | added | not-a-user | timeline score: 9 | |
| Mar 23, 2015 at 19:16 | answer | added | user4704595 | timeline score: -4 | |
| Dec 27, 2014 at 3:37 | comment | added | ETFovac | Great question and makred answer. Link that helped me: msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/0e5kx78b.aspx | |
| Mar 12, 2012 at 4:03 | history | edited | Alok Save | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 20 characters in body
|
| Mar 12, 2012 at 2:28 | vote | accept | Yishu Fang | ||
| Mar 11, 2012 at 18:10 | comment | added | Vaughn Cato | I think the main reason is that it is tricky to get right. In principle, you could probably do what you are talking about, but there would be some weird side effects. Like if your array example was allowed, then you may be able to get the value of A::c[0], but not be able to pass A::c to a function since that would require an address, and compile-time constants don't have an address. C++11 has enabled some of this by the use of constexpr. | |
| Mar 11, 2012 at 17:19 | answer | added | user541686 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 11, 2012 at 17:16 | answer | added | Alok Save | timeline score: 176 | |
| Mar 11, 2012 at 17:01 | history | asked | Yishu Fang | CC BY-SA 3.0 |