https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83428
--- Comment #5 from Wolfgang Roehrl <wolfgang.roe...@gi-de.com> --- Hello, I just came back from holidays and I read your comments on my bug report. For two reasons I still think that the compiler should not use dynamic initialization for objX - at least not without any warning: a) According to my understanding the Standard requests static initialization for a class-type variable whose constexpr constructor is invoked with constant expressions (cf. C++17 Standard, 6.6.2/2;); and it is additionally required that all sub-objects of the variable can also be initialized statically. But I don't see that the Standard requests that the ctor definition has to precede the variable definition in order to get static initialization. b) The behaviour of the compiler ist not user-friendly: A program may rely on the static initialization of an object - especially if the object contains atomic variables. Now somebody may modify the programm and move the constructor definition unintentionally behind the definiton of the object. The program still compiles but the program behaviour has changed silently and to fix this kind of bugs can be very time-consuming. With kind regards, W. Roehrl
