On Mon, 29 Jun 2015 10:19:33 +0000, Marc Schütz wrote: > On Monday, 29 June 2015 at 02:07:57 UTC, ketmar wrote: >> On Sat, 27 Jun 2015 22:49:13 +0000, Tofu Ninja wrote: >> >>> On Saturday, 27 June 2015 at 22:20:40 UTC, ketmar wrote: >>>> 2. no. >>> >>> Hmm... any reason why? >> >> if instantiated template was not used in any code that makes into >> compiled binary, compiler is free to remove it with all it's ctors. it >> may do that, or may not, but removal is allowed. >> so while that can work now (i didn't checked), it may stop working in >> next version (or with another compiler), and that will not be a bug. > > Does the specification really say that? This isn't obvious to me at all. > I would expect static ctors to be treated as if they were "referenced" > by the initialization logic (though I understand it's not an explicit > reference, they just end up in a special section that the runtime can > inspect).
it doesn't, afair, but it's quite natural. if user type was throwed out as unused, it would be very strange to insist on keeping it's initialization code.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
