You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Constant initialization is performed if a variable or temporary object with static or thread storage duration is initialized by a constant initializer ([expr.const]) for the entity. If constant initialization is not performed, a variable with static storage duration ([basic.stc.static]) or thread storage duration ([basic.stc.thread]) is zero-initialized ([dcl.init]). Together, zero-initialization and constant initialization are called static initialization; all other initialization is dynamic initialization. All static initialization strongly happens before ([intro.races]) any dynamic initialization. [ Note: The dynamic initialization of non-local variables is described in [basic.start.dynamic]; that of local static variables is described in [stmt.dcl]. — end note ]
Both constant and zero-initialization can happen at runtime, as long as they happen before "main". So "runtime" is not exactly wrong here, but probably not really appropriate. I've replaced it with "zero-initialization", which already had an entry in the index.
[basic.start.static]/2
To verify this, see line # 5735 in the committed pull request:
5735 \indextext{initialization!runtime}%
AFAICT this is basically saying that zero-initialization is somehow related to run-time initialization, which doesn't seem to be correct.
To correct this, simply reverse the content of lines 6067 and 6068 in basic.tex.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: