On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 11:53 AM Tom Honermann via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> 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?

I'm not sure. The kind of symbol produced could change and thereby impact compatibility with previously built code.

Tom.

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@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals

--

Brian Bi