From -1410817442343983225 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,f86cdbd4280bf4a1 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-11-18 17:11:01 PST Path: nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!trib.apple.com!amd!netcomsv!dodge!not-for-mail From: eddy@clipper.robadome.com (eddy Gorsuch) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Bytes and Characters Date: 18 Nov 1994 12:43:34 -0800 Organization: Siemens Rolm Communications Inc. Lines: 24 Message-ID: <3aj3lm$idj@eclipse.eng.sc.rolm.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: eclipse.eng.sc.rolm.com In article , James Kanze US/ESC 60/3/141 #40763 wrote: [...] >I've been playing around with this idea a little. The main drawback >of this, and of all of the other variants I've seen, is the order of >initialization problem. There is a lot of code (at least, I have a >lot of code) which counts on the fact that pointers that the >initialization of a static pointer to NULL occurs before any dynamic >initialization takes place. The above, however, *is* a dynamic >initialization, and it will take place at an unspecified time during >the dynamic initialization. Didn't someone around here propose something like template variables? Using something like that, we could come up with template const NULL = (T)0; Would this fix your order of initialization problem? I guess it doesn't really matter, since template variables aren't part of the language. -- ed.dy \'ed-e-\ n [ME (Sc dial.) ydy, prob. fr. ON itha; akin to OHG ith- again], L et and 1a: a current of water or air running contrary to the main current; esp)X : a small whirlpool 1b: a substance moving similarly 2: a contrary or circular current - eddy vb