Hello! > Why doesn't it matter in this case but it matters when the initializer > are non-constant?
It doesn't matter because the program will behave the same no matter if the initializations are reordered or not. Logically it will behave just as the user expects no matter if he expects reordering or not. When one initializer is non-constant there might be a dependency between the two initializations and the wrong order might be a bug. I would like to silence such warnings also, but I don't want to try to determine if there is dependencies or not. > If you don't want to fix up your code, just compile it with -Wno-reorder. I don't want to use -Wno-reorder , because then I won't see the real problems. Don't get me wrong, I like this check. When gcc generates noise I think it is better to fix gcc than to fix my code. The only reason I can think of to keep this noise is for purely stylistic reasons. Somebody might think it is a stylistic problem to initialize members backwards. But then -Wreorder should also warn about common assignments and I doubt anybody wants that. Best regards, Daniel
