Well, you have a good reason. Thank you very much!

On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 8:58 PM Thiago Macieira via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On Sunday, 4 September 2022 03:45:51 CDT blacktea hamburger via
> Std-Proposals
> wrote:
> > Well, it doesn't quite make sense, but it's possible. I think the
> standard
> > should allow all possible and logically plausible codes.
>
> No, it shouldn't and doesn't. There are very good reasons to disallow
> certain
> code that some people may reasonably find logical (such as signed integer
> overload). So your argument is not going to hold water.
>
> If you want the standard to change, then provide a good and different
> argument.
>
> > The wording of [expr.delete]/2 seems to only take into account that
> objects
> > can only be created by new expressions (since IOC was added very late),
> and
> > that's the issue.
>
> I don't see the issue. Why can;'t you new this object using the placement
> new?
>
> --
> Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
> Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering
>
>
>
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>