Re: Simple question on Pointers

From:

"Igor Tandetnik" <itandetnik@mvps.org>

Newsgroups:

microsoft.public.vc.language

Date:

Wed, 3 Dec 2008 21:15:55 -0500

Message-ID:

<OWR#$YbVJHA.3912@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>

"Alan Carre" <alan@twilightgames.com> wrote in message
news:u52AeRbVJHA.2928@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl

"Igor Tandetnik" <itandetnik@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:e4iH$qaVJHA.1244@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

Alan Carre <alan@twilightgames.com> wrote:
Why is this a problem? Objects get constructed on demand - isn't
that what you wanted? As long as you don't have circular
dependencies, at which point nothing can save you.

But they don't! I have ample proof that that's not true [ie. painful
experience]. If they're at global scope the order of construction is
in the order that the linker encounters them.

I'm talking about function-static objects, like this:

Singleton* getInstance() {
    static Singleton instance;
    return &instance;
}

These get constructed the first time the function is called.
--
With best wishes,
    Igor Tandetnik

With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not
necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to
land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly
overhead. -- RFC 1925