Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!vsi1!octopus!sjsumcs!horstman
From: horstman@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Cay Horstmann)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: constants inside structures
Message-ID: <1990Mar13.082527.10207@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu>
Date: 13 Mar 90 08:25:27 GMT
References: <11024@saturn.ucsc.edu> <5104@odin.SGI.COM>
Reply-To: horstman@sjsumcs.SJSU.EDU (Cay Horstmann)
Organization: San Jose State University
Lines: 27

Suppose I wish to hide a numeric constant inside a struct, to
avoid cluttering the global name space, and suppose that
constant gives the size of another array in the struct. Kind of like

struct X
{	static const int SIZE;
	int a[ SIZE ];
};

const int X::SIZE = 10;

except of course that doesn't work. But

struct X
{	static const int SIZE = 10;
	int a[ SIZE ];
};

is illegal. I know I could declare X_SIZE outside X, but I LIKE the
idea behind static data and functions inside structs/classes. Why
clutter up the global name space if you don't have to? 

Why indeed is the second form declared illegal? It sure beats the
yucky syntax of the first case. (Same for initializers of static
variables...)

Cay