How to define class final constants?

[Allen]

I defines FileLogConstant class as following.

class FileLogConstant
{
public:
static const INT32 REGISTER_LOGGER ;

static const INT32 REGISTER_METHOD ;

static const INT32 MAX_LOGGER_COUN T;

static const INT32 MAX_LOGGER_METH OD_COUNT;

static const INT32 MAX_LOG_MESG_CO UNT;

static const INT32 MAX_REG_COUNT;

static const INT32 MAX_FILE_LENGTH ;
};

/////////////////////////////////////////////BLOCK
DEF//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

const INT32 FileLogConstant ::REGISTER_LOGG ER = 0x00;

const INT32 FileLogConstant ::REGISTER_METH OD = 0x01;

const INT32 FileLogConstant ::MAX_LOGGER_CO UNT = 64;

const INT32 FileLogConstant ::MAX_LOGGER_ME THOD_COUNT = 128;

const INT32 FileLogConstant ::MAX_LOG_MESG_ COUNT = 128;

const INT32 FileLogConstant ::MAX_REG_COUNT = 16;

const INT32 FileLogConstant ::MAX_FILE_LENG TH = 4 + 4 +
FileLogConstant ::MAX_LOGGER_CO UNT *
(16 + 4 + 64 * FileLogConstant ::MAX_LOGGER_ME THOD_COUNT) + 4 + 4 +
FileLogConstant ::MAX_LOG_MESG_ COUNT * (2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 256) +
FileLogConstant ::MAX_REG_COUNT * (2 + 2 + 64);

/////////////////////////////////////////////////BLOCK
DEF////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

class Foo
{
public:
char buffer[FileLogConstant ::MAX_FILE_LENG TH];
};

when BLOCK DEF is put in FileLogConstant .cpp file, the buffer
declaration of class Foo will be compiled with an error. While BLOCK
DEF is put in FileLogConstant .h file, the compiler will generate many
const FileLogConstant ::MAX_FILE_LENG TH already defined errors.

How to define class final constants?

[kwikius]

Allen wrote:

No. It cannot be compiled by VC++ 6.0.

VC6 has a lot of problems with implementing the C++ standard correctly,
IOW its probably the compiler in this case that is letting you down.

I will test with gcc.

If it fails with gcc then again try a more recent version if possible,
but if it does fail then you probably have a quite old version of gcc.

regards
Andy Little

[Allen]

"kwikius дµÀ£º
"

Allen wrote:

VC6 has a lot of problems with implementing the C++ standard correctly,
IOW its probably the compiler in this case that is letting you down.
If it fails with gcc then again try a more recent version if possible,
but if it does fail then you probably have a quite old version of gcc.

When was the newest C++ standard put forward?
VC6 may be implement C++ standard before 1998.

[kwikius]

Allen wrote:

"kwikius дµÀ£º
"

Allen wrote:

VC6 has a lot of problems with implementing the C++ standard correctly,
IOW its probably the compiler in this case that is letting you down.
If it fails with gcc then again try a more recent version if possible,
but if it does fail then you probably have a quite old version of gcc.

When was the newest C++ standard put forward?
VC6 may be implement C++ standard before 1998.

According to my copy of the C++ standard, BS ISO/IEC 14882 (the C++
standard) was ratified in 1997, however AFAIK Microsoft Borland and
others saw the potential of C++ for Windows development way before that
of course and so produced compilers predicting I guess what the
standard would be and also perhaps more importantly trying to keep
compatibility with their previous software. Also the C++ templates
specification was rushed into the standard quite late as far as I know,
which of course put existing compilers in a tricky position, IOW you
can't blame them for that and MSVC1.0 was my first C++ compiler which I
am really grateful to for introducing me to the language.

As I understand it the template specs were put in the standard without
anyone really having a working compiler that implemented them
correctly. It seems that Bjarne Stroustrup must have cast some sort of
spell over the Approval committee, which even he was surprised actually
worked if I remember from reading his book '"The design and evolution
of C++". So this is the sort of problem compiler writers faced at that
time.

Also I think that the ability to define static integral constants
inside the class definition was another late addition.

For the MS series both VC7.1 (not VC7.0) and VC8.0 do a good job of
implementing the current Standard.

As for gcc I curreently have gcc 4.0 , for earlier versions I am not so
sure, but a wild guess is to try to get a version after around gcc 3.3
or so.

And even in the latest compilers, if you look hard enough, you can find
something that is not correct.

That is part of the mystique of C++ FAICS. No one will ever truly
master it. And of course as soon as compilers get up to speed there
will be a new version of the standard and the whole rigmarole of non
conforming compilers will continue as usual :-)

regards
Andy Little

[BobR]

Allen wrote in message ...
/* """
"kwikius дµÀ£º
"

Allen wrote:

VC6 has a lot of problems with implementing the C++ standard correctly,
IOW its probably the compiler in this case that is letting you down.

If it fails with gcc then again try a more recent version if possible,
but if it does fail then you probably have a quite old version of gcc.

When was the newest C++ standard put forward?
VC6 may be implement C++ standard before 1998.

""" */

Ah ha, old compiler. Then maybe you can use the old hack:

class Allen{
enum { size = 1000 };
int i[size];
// .....
};

--
Bob R
POVrookie