Suppose that I have some typeclass trait FooBar[X] and an instance of FooBar[Int]: given intIsFooBar: FooBar[Int] = new FooBar {} Now, suppose that I have an interface Intf that has some member t...

The code below is in the same translation unit and A::v is defined after x, why A::v is not initialized to "ok" ? #include <string> #include <iostream> std::string foo() { r...

I'm aware this question has been asked many times, but this seems to be a slightly different variation which I can't figure out. Consider the following code: #include <cstdio> struct TestVal...

I know that in C++ the declaration of members in the class header defines the initialization order. Can you tell me why C++ choose this design? Are there any benefits to force the initialize order ...

Generally it is said that the destructors of static objects are called in the reverse order of the constructors. As I understand, constinit objects are initialized at compile time, so their destruc...

Following code #include <iostream> struct A { A() { std::cout << std::endl; } }; struct B { static inline A a; }; int main() { } succeeds after compiling with gcc, but crashes w...

C++ standards (earlier than C++17, at least) have said this about initialization order. Objects with static storage duration defined in namespace scope in the same translation unit and dynamica...

cppreference says about std::atexit : The functions may be called concurrently with the destruction of the objects with static storage duration and with each other, maintaining the guarantee tha...

Consider: int f () { static int i = 0; return i++; } struct Test { int a, b; Test () : a(f()), b(f()) {} }; Test t; I know that a is initialized before b due to the order of their declarat...

I have some doubts about construction and initialization order guarantees in C++. For instance, the following code has four classes X, Y, Z and W. The main function instantiates an object of class ...

I am looking for a good solution for a decentralized module registration. I do not want a single unit that uses all module units of the project, but I would rather like to let the module units reg...

When I use static variables in C++, I often end up wanting to initialize one variable passing another to its constructor. In other words, I want to create static instances that depend on each other...

During my research into the best way to build a Singleton in C# I stumbled across the following article where there is a brief mention that in C++ "The C++ specification left some ambiguity aro...

I have this question, which i thought about earlier, but figured it's not trivial to answer int x = x + 1; int main() { return x; } My question is whether the behavior of the program is defined...

There is a simple and well-known pattern to avoid the static initialization fiasco, described in section 10.13 of the C++ FAQ Lite. In this standard pattern, there is a trade-off made in that eith...

Initialization order of free objects is undefined in C++. But what about the following? namespace foo { char const* str = "hey"; struct A { A() { cout << str; } } obj; } Is this still ...