Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > > I'm not one the authors of the book mentioned but I will say what I > know (from experience both as a user and casual implementor). The > issue of enum/static const is an endless debate. However, one thing is > sure: Even with the amended paragraph in the Standard (redefinition of > "used"), passing an lvalue to a function that expects a const > reference more or less takes the referenced entity's address, and as > such makes the "static const object" used, therefore a definition is > required. One looses the "purely compile-time constant" aspect.
This matches my experience (as a user only :) > Yes, a smarter compiler may do better, but such smarter compilers are > quite rare :-) > Yes, the thingy ends up in the link map (as a local symbol). Just to make sure: Do you "vote" in favor of enums? I have seen problems with 'static const ...', but I have never seen problems with enums (although they theoretically exist). Both have their drawbacks, it seems we have to choose the petty evil... > -- Gaby Regards, Daniel -- Daniel Frey aixigo AG - financial training, research and technology Schloß-Rahe-Straße 15, 52072 Aachen, Germany fon: +49 (0)241 936737-42, fax: +49 (0)241 936737-99 eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], web: http://www.aixigo.de _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
