Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!masnet!rose!phil.calvin
From: phil.calvin@rose.uucp (PHIL CALVIN)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Static Constructors
Message-ID: <05c3fa6bec3a27f37740@rose.uucp>
Date: 29 Mar 91 14:20:00 GMT
Organization: Rose Media, ON, CANADA
Lines: 50



  Forgive me if this is a dead issue, I have never seen mention of it
anywhere.

  Why are STATIC (for lack of a better word) Constructors not allowed??

  It seems to me that they could be useful for many types of 
classes:

//
// Windows management.
//
class Window
  {
public:
  static Window();   // Initializes window management
  Window();          // Normal object constructor
  ...
  };

  If static constructors are restricted to having zero arguments, they
could simply be implemented in the normal startup code.

//
// Alternative
//
class Window
  {
public:
  static void SetUp(); // Initializes window management
  Window();            // Constructor
  ...
  };

  In this case, the main() code (Or somewhere else) must do something
like this:

main()
  {
  Window::SetUp();     // Forget this at yer own risk
  ...
  }

  By the same argument, It would follow that STATIC destructors would
be another useful addtion to the language.

...Phil (phil.calvin@rose.uucp)
---