Hi John, From the standard: 9.4.2 Static data members 4 If a static data member is of const integral or const enumeration type, its declaration in the class definition can specify a constant-initializer which shall be an integral constant expression (5.19). In that case, the member can appear in integral constant expressions within its scope. The member shall still be defined in a namespace scope if it is used in the program and the namespace scope definition shall not contain an initializer. so adding the line const short S::l1; solves the problem. But I still don't understand neither why passing by value doesn't cause the error. On 11 Feb 2005, at 01:03, John Eddy wrote:
The following bit of code gives me an undefined symbol (l1) when using gcc 3.2.2-5.8. Is there something wrong with the code or is there a bug in the compiler or a setting I don't know about, etc?
struct S { static const short l1 = 10; };
void go(const short& l) {}; // causes undefined symbol l1
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { go(S::l1); return 0; }
If I do normal, non-in-class-initialization, the problem doesn't appear nor does it appear if I accept the short by value in go.
Thanks, John _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Tony Han Bao tonybao@mac.com