c++/6546: static const members optimization failure

[Phil Edwards]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 08:42:29AM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Nathan Myers <ncm-nospam@cantrip.org> writes:
> 
> | Furthermore, it insists on having a int foo::bar defined 
> | someplace, creating a porting difficulty from other compilers 
> | that don't.
> 
> Well, I think it is assuming the compiler will not require the
> definition that is the non-portable assumption.

I can't speak to the loading-twice issue, but I agree with Gaby here.
ISO says it must be defined, I'm perfectly comfortable with the compiler
failing if it's not defined.


Phil

-- 
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace.  We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms.  Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.            - Samuel Adams