C++ Logo


Advanced search

Subject: Re: [isocpp-ext] "constinit" seems to be very confusing
From: Tony V E (tvaneerd_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-11-22 17:23:17

We could have reused static! (again)

int x = static f();


Sent from my BlackBerry portable Babbage Device
From: Gabriel Dos Reis via SG20
Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2020 3:54 PM
To: ext@lists.isocpp.org
Reply To: sg20@lists.isocpp.org
Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis; C++ Education Reflector; Barry Revzin
Subject: Re: [SG20] [isocpp-ext] "constinit" seems to be very confusing

We used to call it "static initialization" - which contrasted with dynamic initialization.

-- Gaby

From: Ext <ext-bounces@lists.isocpp.org> on behalf of Barry Revzin via Ext <ext@lists.isocpp.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2020, 7:16 AM
To: Evolution Working Group mailing list
Cc: Barry Revzin; C++ Education Reflector
Subject: Re: [isocpp-ext] "constinit" seems to be very confusing

On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 9:08 AM Nicolai Josuttis via Ext <ext@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
Starting to learn and document C++20, I just realized that
the keyword "constinit" seems very confusing.
Every naive programmer would assume it means "init a const",
but it seems the const is simply wrong; it is the opposite.
Or as Jonathan Müller wrote in a talk:
  constinit = constexpr - const

Now I wonder how to teach that.
Could somebody elaborate please why we have chosen this name
and what is the best way to make this name plausible to ordinary


The name comes from mandating that we perform constant initialization for this variable.


SG20 list run by sg20-owner@lists.isocpp.org

Older Archives on Google Groups