[boost] Re: Strange gcc 3.2.2-5.8 behavior

John Eddy wrote:

Thank you Jonathan and Tony,

Fortunately, the class in which I am using this construct is templatized so the initializations as you (Tony) suggested are fine appearing just below the class. If it weren't a templatized class, doing so would produce multiply defined symbol errors. I suppose the only way around that is to have an implementation file which requires a library be built, etc. yes? (bummer)

You can often get around this problem by inheriting the static member from a specialization of a class template. Jonathan