Welcome to OStack Knowledge Sharing Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

Categories

0 votes
320 views
in Technique[技术] by (71.8m points)

c++ - Why are anonymous namespaces not a sufficient replacement for namespace-static, according to the standards committee?

According to this answer, namespace-scoped static variables were undeprecated in C++11. That is, they were deprecated in C++03, because anonymous namespaces were considered better. But C++11 undeprecated them.

Why? N3296 lists the reasoning for this as:

The use of static in namespace scope should not be deprecated. Anonymous namespaces are not a sufficient replacement for the functionality.

This was apparently accepted by the committee. Why? What is it about anonymous namespaces that does not completely replace this functionality?

I would prefer answers that had some documentation or paper trail of a standards committee discussion.

See Question&Answers more detail:os

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

1 Answer

0 votes
by (71.8m points)

This is a more in-depth explanation.

Although 7.3.1.1 [namespace.unnamed] states that the use of the static keyword for declaring variables in namespace scope is deprecated because the unnamed namespace provides a superior alternative, it is unlikely that the feature will be removed at any point in the foreseeable future, especially in light of C compatibility concerns. The Committee should consider removing the deprecation.

One issue I know is that anonymous namespaces can't specialize templates outside of the namespace block. This is why inline namespace was introduced, although static works too. Also, static plays much nice with macros.


与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
Welcome to OStack Knowledge Sharing Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Click Here to Ask a Question

...