Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 1019971
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 16, 20262026-05-16T11:05:47+00:00 2026-05-16T11:05:47+00:00

I know how to initialize a static member that’s not an integer, but I’m

  • 0

I know how to initialize a static member that’s not an integer, but I’m wondering, what is the rationale behind the syntax for this? I’d like to be able to just put the value in the class, like you can with an integer member, a la:

class A {
  static const int i = 3;
};

I realise this could mean more rebuilding if I change the value since it’s a change in the header – but in some cases that’s pretty unlikely – and just as bad as changing a #define in the header anyway.

It doesn’t seem like something that would be terribly hard for the compiler to understand. Are there technical reasons why it works the way it does? Or is it just a case of the compiler enforcing the good practice of separating the implementation from the definition?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-16T11:05:48+00:00Added an answer on May 16, 2026 at 11:05 am

    Because that is the class declaration. You don’t have any object yet.

    You need to actually define the value somewhere — somewhere specific.

    Since it is static it’s actually taking up space somewhere. But, since the .H file which has that declaration can be #included in many source files, which one defines holds the actual space it is using? Having the compiler automatically define the space in every object file and having the linker sort it out would be a violation of the “One Definition Rule“.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 499k
  • Answers 500k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer This is not pretty but it works: rm -R $(ls… May 16, 2026 at 12:45 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer Yes. Override the base1 and base2 methods in Derived to… May 16, 2026 at 12:45 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer No, you can't. Unfortunately, UIEvent doesn't expose any public way… May 16, 2026 at 12:45 pm

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Related Questions

In this contrived example, I have a static initialization function that is run at
When I use static variables in C++, I often end up wanting to initialize
I have a static std::map<std::string, CreateGUIFunc> in a class that basically holds strings identifying
I'm thinking over an ASP.NET application that uses ESENT for persistance. At this point
I'd like to map string to an instance member functions, and store each mapping
When I write code like this in VS 2008: .h struct Patterns { string
I would like to know where put monkey patching code like the following in
For some reason I have to initialize the ListBox items in behind code, the
I want to have a Singleton that will be auto instantiated on program start.
My previous question about this subject was answered and I got some tests working

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.