Why static data members must be defined in C++?

Question

I always struggle to discover why I'm getting "Undefined reference to static variable" in my code, and I always end up in these questions:

Undefined reference to static variable c++

Undefined reference to static variable

I understand that I need to define my data outside the class declaration.

In the example:

class Helloworld {
  public:
     static int x;
     void foo();
};

int Helloworld::x = 0; // Or whatever is the most appropriate value
                       // for initializing x. Notice, that the
                       // initializer is not required: if absent,
                       // x will be zero-initialized.

I must initiate x to some value. But what about static members that are class instances? Why simply the compiler won't make an instance for me with the default constructor?

If I write

class A {
    public: 
        B b;
}

then I can do

A a;
a.b;

I don't need to define B b outside the A class declaration. Why do I need to do it for the static example below?

class A {
    public: 
        static B b;
}

B A::b

"Why simply the compiler won't make an instance for me with the default constructor?" Where should it do that? If it does, then every file that includes the header is going to make an instance. So you will have several instances. That's why you need to tell it where to define it (meaning in which cpp file.) C++17 introduces inline to allow multiple definitions in every cpp file, but in the end keep only one of them. — Nikos C.
– Nikos C., Commented Aug 7, 2019 at 5:30
@NikosC. this is the answer that made me understand why it won't define in the header, thanks! — Poperton
– Poperton, Commented Aug 8, 2019 at 2:13

StoryTeller - Unslander Monica · Accepted Answer · 2019-08-07 05:30:53Z

6

But what about static members that are class instances? Why simply the compiler won't make an instance for me with the default constructor?

But make it where? The rational for this prior to C++17 was that there must be only one such definition of the static member under the one definition rule. So it was up to the programmer to specify exactly in which translation unit that definition should live, even if the object was to undergo default initialization. The compiler wasn't trusted to "do the right thing"^TM.

As compilers got smarter, and C++17 came about, it turned out that compilers really can be made to figure it out. In C++17 you can specify the static member as an inline variable, and the compiler/linker will sort it out.

class A {
    public: 
        static inline B b; // There, an inline variable default initialized.
};

answered Aug 7, 2019 at 5:30

StoryTeller - Unslander Monica

172k22 gold badges401 silver badges481 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

1 Comment

Justin Over a year ago

Do note that inline variables come at a small cost: initialization becomes more complex, because initialization order needs to be guaranteed top to bottom for a single translation unit, and inline variables are in multiple translation units. godbolt.org/z/h_-HAg

Michael Chourdakis · Accepted Answer · 2019-08-07 05:29:25Z

5

Static members exist before any object is created, that is what makes them static. Therefore their initialization does not happen on first instance, they are there already.

They are actually global variables within a class scope.

That said, you can use the inline modifier to initialize them inside the class without an out of class declaration.

Info here and here.

answered Aug 7, 2019 at 5:29

Michael Chourdakis

11.2k3 gold badges52 silver badges95 bronze badges

1 Comment

Justin Over a year ago

Do note that inline variables come at a small cost: initialization becomes more complex, because initialization order needs to be guaranteed top to bottom for a single translation unit, and inline variables are in multiple translation units. godbolt.org/z/h_-HAg

Pedro LM · Accepted Answer · 2019-08-07 05:31:41Z

-1

You need to define B outside the class for the same reason you have to define x outside the class: because it’s a static member. Being a primitive type (int) or class type (B) has nothing to do with it!

answered Aug 7, 2019 at 5:31

Pedro LM

7604 silver badges13 bronze badges

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Why static data members must be defined in C++?

3 Answers 3

1 Comment

1 Comment

Comments

Your Answer

Linked

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

3 Answers 3

1 Comment

1 Comment

Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Linked

Related