c++ const aggregate vs constructor
Xiaolong Tang
txltamu@gmail.com
Wed Jun 27 10:27:00 GMT 2007
On Jun 25, 2007, at 4:59 PM, Kevin Yohe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to define a constant table that can be initialized at
> compile-time and linked into ROM. I had envisioned two ways of
> defining
> this; either
>
> struct sAggregate
> {
> int m0;
> int m1;
> int m2;
> int m3;
> };
>
> const sAggregate table1[] =
> { { 0, 0, 0, 0 },
> { 1, 1, 1, 1 },
> { 2, 2, 2, 2 },
> { 3, 3, 3, 3 }
> };
As a POD type, this initialization is called static initialization
(from constants) , which shall be
performed at compile time (most implementation).
> or
>
> struct sConstruct
> {
> int m0;
> int m1;
> int m2;
> int m3;
>
> sConstruct( a0, a1, a2, a3 )
> : m0(a0), m1(a1), m2(a2), m3(a3)
> {};
> };
>
> const sConstruct table2[] =
> { sConstruct( 0, 0, 0, 0 ),
> sConstruct( 1, 1, 1, 1 ),
> sConstruct( 2, 2, 2, 2 ),
> sConstruct( 3, 3, 3, 3 )
> };
>
On the contrary, this is not a POD type (user_declared constructors)
, and is dynamic initialization happening at run time.
'cause this direct initialization might involve constructor resolution.
Am I rit?
>
More information about the Gcc-help
mailing list