On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 11:53 AM Tom Honermann via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 1/18/24 9:08 AM, ஜெய்கணேஷ் குமரன் via Std-Proposals wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> Currently, in C++ you must put the inline keyword on to have a static data member with an in-class initialiser.
>
> inline is only needed if the data member is not declared const.
>
> I reälly find this unnecessary, as it is obvious that the data member needs to be inline to have an in-class initialiser.
>
> Current:
> inline static type s_member = ...;
>
> Proposed:
> static type s_member = ...;
>
> Implicitly declaring the static data member inline would break existing
> code like the following by introducing a redefinition.
>
> struct S {
> static const int sdm = 1;
> };
> const int S::sdm;
>
> In C++17, `constexpr` static data members were made implicitly inline and
the out-of-class definition was changed to be a redundant redeclaration. In
principle, this could be done for other types of static data members too,
couldn't it?

> Tom.
>
> Note: I do not have the time to participate in standardisation in order to open formal proposals, but I wish someöne else does based on my ideas.
>
> Thanks,
> Jaiganésh Kumaran.
>
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>

-- 
*Brian Bi*