To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <AAuNrmY0pst@mmf.univ.simbirsk.su>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Organization: Moscow State University Branch in Ulianovsk, MMF
From: akondra AT mmf DOT univ DOT simbirsk DOT su (A.V. Kondratiev)
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 97 10:47:49 +0400
Subject: Static member functions in constructor
Lines: 34
Precedence: bulk

I encountered a strange g++ behavior.
I tried to pass a static member function as a default parameter
of constructor. Here is an example:

typedef void ( *ft )();

class A {
public:
  static void F1();
  const ft pf;
  A(ft f=F1):pf(f){}         // (1)
//  A(ft f=0):pf(f ? f:F1){} // (2)
};

void A::F1() {/*something*/}

int main() {
  A a;
  return 0;
}

In case (1) the compiler reports that F1 is not defined. GCC doc
tells that `g++' reports as undefined symbols any static data
members that lack definitions. But I provided definition for F1!

I tried to work around this strange behavior as in case (2). It works
but may anybody suggest a better solution? Of course, the easiest way
is to declare F1 as a normal outer function, not as a static member.
But, in my opinion, it is not a good solution in object-oriented
programming.

Aleksey.