I have the following problem: My (C++-)project consists of several subprojects. In each, I have several files with code I want to run at startup. My solution so far is to use static variables which call the respective code on initialization like this: // Foo.cpp static TFooRegistry sFooRegistry; // does stuff in constructor. When b...
At some point I remember reading that threads can't be safely created until the first line of main(), because compilers insert special code to make threading work that runs during static initialization time. So if you have a global object that creates a thread on construction, your program may crash. But now I can't find the original art...
I have a bug on my plate to locate and rewrite a static variable in one of our libraries that is taking up launch time in our application. I am not familiar with the library code base and am asking for good heuristics/techniques/grep commands/etc. that would ease my task in identifying the location of said static variable? (P.S. I'm alr...
I want to know why exactly static variables in C, C++ and Java are initialized by zero by default? And why this is not true for local variables? ...
I'm trying to debug a C++ program compiled with GCC that freezes at startup. GCC mutex protects function's static local variables, and it appears that waiting to acquire such a lock is why it freezes. How this happens is rather confusing. First module A's static initialization occurs (there are __static_init functions GCC invokes that ar...
Is it possible to get the class type from inside the static initialization block? This is a simplified version of what I currently have:: class Person extends SuperClass { String firstName; static{ // This function is on the "SuperClass": // I'd for this function to be able to get "Person.class" without me //...
This question made me question a practice I had been following for years. For thread-safe initialization of function-local static const objects I protect the actual construction of the object, but not the initialization of the function-local reference referring to it. Something like this: namspace { const some_type& create_const_th...
I wonder if it's reliable to use a construction like: private static final Map<String, String> engMessages; private static final Map<String, String> rusMessages; static { engMessages = new HashMap<String, String> () {{ put ("msgname", "value"); }}; rusMessages = new HashMap<String, String> () {{ put ("msgnam...
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 either the constructed object gets never destructed (which is not a problem if the destructor does not have important side effects) or the static ...
I'm writing a tracing library that is available as a DLL. It is consumed by basically every component in my system. One tricky requirement is that the tracing functions need to be invoked very early in the process lifetime, even before main() runs. Consumers of this library include executables, statically linked DLLs, delay-loaded DLL...
This is another variation of an old theme: The initialization order of static objects in different translation units is not defined. Below is a stripped-down example of my particular szenario. The classes G and F are non-POD types. F depends on G is the sense that to construct an instance of F you need some number of instances of G. (Fo...