Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!mcdchg!chinet!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!alice!bs
From: bs@alice.UUCP (Bjarne Stroustrup)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Summary of global constructor respo
Summary: it is much harder than it sounds
Message-ID: <8370@alice.UUCP>
Date: 29 Oct 88 14:18:10 GMT
References: <5964@columbia.edu> <4800041@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ
Lines: 17



m.cs.uiuc.edu writes:

 > There should be some way to specify the ordering of static modules and how
 > those modules get initialized. This specification should occur either
 > at compile time or link time.

This is easy to say, but hard to do. How would you specify it? In the language
or in the environment? If not in the language what could you assume about
the environment? The scheme we decide on, if any, must be able to work even
when incremental linking is used.

 > As it is, I tend to malloc many structures that I chould otherwise statically
 > allocate.

It is wise often wise to use the free store if you depend on order of construction. I hope that by `malloc()' you meant `new'.