2

I'm taking addresses of the following instantiated variable templates from two translation units:

template<class T> bool b = true; template<class T> const bool cb = true; template<class T> inline const bool icb = true;

I'm printing addresses of b<int>, cb<int> and icb<int>. Here is what clang says:

0x6030c0 0x401ae4 0x401ae5 // first translation unit 0x6030c0 0x401ae4 0x401ae5 // second translation unit

All addresses are the same, kind of expected. And here is what gcc says:

0x6015b0 0x400ef5 0x400ef4 // first translation unit 0x6015b0 0x400ef6 0x400ef4 // second translation unit

The address of cb<int> changes. Huh? Is this a bug? If not, could someone please explain this effect to me?

Improve this question
2
  • Related: How do inline variables work? Commented Oct 29, 2019 at 14:34
  • 1
    Nothing says that initialized const variables needs to have addresses at all. If they're not ODR-used, a compiler can optimize them as compile-time constants. And since they are defined in a header file (I assume) there's nothing that requires the variables to end up in the same location in all translation units (since each translation unit have their own instantiation of the templates). Commented Oct 29, 2019 at 14:36

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3

This, to me, appears to be related to CWG Issue 1713:

Linkage of variable template specializations

Given a namespace-scope declaration like

template<typename T> T var = T();

should T<const int> have internal linkage by virtue of its const-qualified type? Or should it inherit the linkage of the template?

Notes from the February, 2014 meeting:

CWG noted that linkage is by name, and a specialization of a variable template does not have a name separate from that of the variable template, thus the specialization will have the linkage of the template.

Clang seems to be following it. The template name has external linkage, and so does the variable spun from it.

Ultimately, the intended linkage of variable template specialization is not too well specified currently by the standard itself. It is specified for regular variables, but the templates are a different beast.

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

1 Comment

"Ultimately, the intended linkage of variable template specialization is not too well specified currently by the standard itself" - OMG, can I quote it? :)
1

From the C++ Standard (6.5 Program and linkage)

3 A name having namespace scope (6.3.6) has internal linkage if it is the name of

(3.2) — a non-inline variable of non-volatile const-qualified type that is neither explicitly declared extern nor previously declared to have external linkage; or

So the specialization of the variable template cb has internal linkage. This means that its address can be different in different compilation units.

Improve this answer

Comments

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.