Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!dinl!noren
From: noren@dinl.uucp (Charles Noren)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Static member definition vs. declaration?
Message-ID: <1851@dinl.mmc.UUCP>
Date: 18 Apr 91 18:20:24 GMT
References: <1848@dinl.mmc.UUCP>
Reply-To: noren@dinl.UUCP (Charles Noren)
Organization: Martin Marietta I&CS, Denver CO.
Lines: 27

Thanks to all who have responded to my question.  I've
tried thanking personally to all who responded but my
mail often bounces.

The answer to the question of a static member declaration,
e.g.,

   class X {static int myVar;};

is that somewhere the static member must be defined, such as,

   int X::myVar;

The reason my compiler permitted no definition was that my
linker was probably smart to infer a definition when one was
not explicitly found.  Also many have pointed out that C++
compilers imperfectly implement the C++ "standard".

Thanks again.


-- 
Chuck Noren
NET:     dinl!noren@ncar.ucar.edu
US-MAIL: Martin Marietta I&CS, MS XL8058, P.O. Box 1260,
         Denver, CO 80201-1260
Phone:   (303) 977-1646