C++ : Why is the order of destruction of these function-local static objects NOT the inverse of thei
C++ : Why is the order of destruction of these function-local static objects NOT the inverse of their order of initialization?
To Access My Live Chat Page,
On Google, Search for "hows tech developer connect"
I promised to share a hidden feature with you, and here it is.
This is a YouTube's feature which works on Desktop.
First, Make sure the video is currently in playing mode.
Then, type the letters 'awesome' on the keyboard.
You will see a flashing rainbow instead of a regular progress bar on YouTube.
A quick introduction about me,
Greetings, my name is Delphi.
Let me help you get the answers you need to your questions.
C++ : Why is the order of destruction of these function-local static objects NOT the inverse of their order of initialization?
If you have more specific queries, please feel free to reach out through comments or chat.
Don't hesitate to provide your answer or insights by leaving a comment below.
Your answer will be recognized and appreciated with a 'heart' from me.
C++ objects : initialization? inverse function-local NOT is of order the Why order of these of destruction static of their the