Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!crdgw1!avraamid
From: avraamid@camelback.crd.ge.com (David Avraamides)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Static member definition vs. declaration?
Message-ID: <AVRAAMID.91Apr24081343@camelback.crd.ge.com>
Date: 24 Apr 91 12:13:43 GMT
References: <1848@dinl.mmc.UUCP> <186@devnull.mpd.tandem.com>
	<37226@ditka.Chicago.COM>
Sender: news@crdgw1.crd.ge.com
Organization: GE Corporate Research & Development
Lines: 22
In-reply-to: comeau@ditka.Chicago.COM's message of 21 Apr 91 17:10:55 GMT

In article <37226@ditka.Chicago.COM> comeau@ditka.Chicago.COM (Greg Comeau) writes:
# In article <186@devnull.mpd.tandem.com> kelley@mpd.tandem.com (Michael Kelley) writes:
# >In article <1848@dinl.mmc.UUCP>, noren@dinl.uucp (Charles Noren) writes:
# >>    class X {static int myVar;};
# >> Do you need to make a definition elsewhere,
# >>    int X::myVar;
# >> I claim you do (and of course you want to initialize it
# 
# You *do*.  A static member only serves as a declaration, and not a
# definition hence a definition still needs to be provided.
# 

What if its not public? Does this make sense?

I use a static numInstances variable in my root class and ++ it in
all constructors and -- it in all destructors. I don't want it to
be publicly visible. What if I don't want it to start at 0? (My
compiler doesn't make me initialize it.)
--
Dave Avraamides
avraamides@crd.ge.com
All opinions are my own...