Re: c++/10086: static const int unresolved in ? : construct

["Chris Kappler" <chrisk at mysticlabs dot com>]

I do not agree.  In the attachment to this email, the commented code
compiles perfectly.  The uncommented code results in a linker error.  I
believe that the two pieces of code are semantically equivalent.

----- Original Message -----
From: <bangerth at dealii dot org>
To: <chrisk at mysticlabs dot com>; <gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org>; <gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org>;
<nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: c++/10086: static const int unresolved in ? : construct


> Synopsis: static const int unresolved in ? : construct
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
> State-Changed-By: bangerth
> State-Changed-When: Fri Mar 14 22:33:31 2003
> State-Changed-Why:
>     Not a bug. You need a definition of the variable.
>
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&p
r=10086

Attachment: bug.cpp
Description: Binary data