Subject: Re: [std-proposals] explicit class
From: Thiago Macieira (thiago_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-11-12 09:55:34
On Monday, 11 November 2019 23:54:06 PST Andrey Semashev via Std-Proposals
> > As to the destructor, my answer is yes. Consider a class that holds
> > global state for a non-terminating process. We would certainly want the
> > developer to consider what should happen if the object somehow gets
> > destroyed! The explicit keyword would force such thinking.
> People normally don't write a program that never terminates. You have to
> have some condition upon which you terminate. At least, on user input or
> a signal.
Also, the compiler doesn't know the process never terminates. If the variable
has static, thread or automatic scope, the compiler needs to generate the
-- Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org Software Architect - Intel System Software Products
STD-PROPOSALS list run by herb.sutter at gmail.com
Standard Proposals Archives on Google Groups