On Tue, Oct 18, 2011, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote about "Re: Newer gcc swallow version control keywords": > No, no, it is optimized out - Elazar tried to make a global non-static > (non-file-scope) variable (non-constant) that *is* used (by the main() > routine - and may be used, including modification, by anyone else. > Apart from that the only difference between C and C++ is that in C++ > you can write a relatively simple constructor code (while dragging > stuff like <vector< and <string> and possibly <algorithm> in) that > will insert a reference into a global container.
I understood his intention differently. He used his "trick" not just in main, but also in every file in his example. Did you actually check this in C++? It seems to me like in C++, you cannot "optimize out" (elliminate the construction of code) unused static const variables whose type have a constructor, because this constructor can basically do *anything*, and this code might be necessary even if the object itself is never used. In my opinion, if gcc does optimize out unused static const variables that have a constructor with side effects, then it is making a mistake. I didn't check if that actually happens. But in any case your original question was about C, not C++. -- Nadav Har'El | Tuesday, Oct 18 2011, n...@math.technion.ac.il |----------------------------------------- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |I'm experiencing both amnesia and deja http://nadav.harel.org.il |vu. I think I've forgotten this before! _______________________________________________ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
