Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!sdcc6!odin!bruss
From: bruss@odin.ucsd.edu (Brian Russ)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: More About Static Members
Message-ID: <12372@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>
Date: 22 Aug 90 16:43:26 GMT
References: <ssimmons.651246617@convex>
Sender: news@sdcc6.ucsd.edu
Distribution: comp
Organization: CSE Dept., U. C. San Diego
Lines: 31
Nntp-Posting-Host: odin.ucsd.edu

In article <ssimmons.651246617@convex> ssimmons@convex.com (Steve Simmons) writes:
>
>
>	class GROUP
>	{
>	  private:
>	    int notShared;
>	    static int shared;
>          public:
>	    GROUP() : { if (shared == 0) doFirstInstanceStuff(); };
>	};
>
>	int GROUP::shared = 0;                // Initialize here
 	^^^

	Two questions.  First, is the 'int' declaration needed here?
'shared' is already known to be an int, I thought ...

	Secondly (this may be GNU C++ specific) I can't get the above
to work (regardless of the 'int' issue) unless 'shared' is declared
as public.  This seems to contradict Lippman, who says that the, uh,
"see-ability" (can't think of the proper term) of a static member (i.e.
is it public or private) affects access but *not* initialization.
GNU C++, however, will complain about the "Initialize here" line,
claiming that "shared" is a private member.  Am I missing something
here?

--
Brian Russ
CSE Department, UC San Diego
..!sdcsvax!bruss	bruss@beowulf.ucsd.edu