On 21 September 2014 12:52, RaJ M wrote: > Appreciate the rapid speed response. > > Missed to add a minor detail in my previous email. > I understand GCC supports and I also understand that it is must to > have the definition for the static const integral when the address is > taken ( in other words lvalue being used) and I have already seen the > link you sent. > > What I wanted to understand specificially is, > > since which version of GCC, GCC started supporting the static const > integral to be in-class initialization and doesn't expect explicit > definition in implementation file when the address is not used. I think GCC has always supported it, because it's valid C++. Do you have reason to believe otherwise?
