上面的代码生成错误:
main.cpp:25:20: error: default member initializer for ‘sa::sb::a’ required before the end of its enclosing class inline static sb b; ^ main.cpp:24:21: note: defined here struct sb { int a = 123;}; ^~~~~~删除内联关键字或默认成员初始化程序起作用。但是仅仅从输出中,我不理解为什么这种用法是错误的。
Removing the inline keyword or the default member initializer works. But just from the output, I don't understand why this usage is wrong.
推荐答案我认为这段代码是正确的,应该被接受;为了避免核心问题1397 。
I think this code is correct and should be accepted; gcc and clang are erring on the side of caution in order to avoid the defect of Core Issue 1397.
该问题规定,如果NSDMI(非静态数据成员初始化器)导致程序格式错误,类的默认默认构造函数。
That issue ruled that a program is ill-formed if a NSDMI (non-static data member initializer) causes the class's defaulted default constructor to be generated.
但是您的代码却不这样做。 NSDMI只是整数文字。导致此问题的示例的代码如 int a =((sa(),123));
However your code doesn't do that. The NSDMI is just an integer literal. The example that prompted this issue had code like int a = ( (sa(), 123) );
我猜可能正在发生:该标准还说,在处理NSDMI时,应该将类 sa 视为完整类。因此,也许编译器会推迟NSDMI处理,直到达到 sa 的大括号为止。然后标记错误,因为内联静态sb b; 会生成 sb :: sb()。
What I guess might be happening is: The standard also says that , when processing the NSDMI, the class sa should be treated as complete. So perhaps the compilers are deferring the NSDMI processing until after the closing brace of sa is reached; and then flagging the error because inline static sb b; would generate sb::sb().
可能该标准仍然存在缺陷,直到现在为止还没有人想到您的示例。
Possibly the standard is still defective and nobody thought of your example until now.
作为一种解决方法,您可以明确提供麻烦的构造函数:
As a workaround you can explicitly provide the troublesome constructor:
struct sb { int a = 123; sb() {} };更多推荐
内联静态成员变量
发布评论