ADA solves this problem with the forever construct, allegedly created because so many of the programs written in ADA terminated with Rapid Planned Dissasembly.

On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 3:55 PM Thiago Macieira via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
On Monday, 11 November 2019 23:54:06 PST Andrey Semashev via Std-Proposals
wrote:
> > 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
destruction code.

--
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
   Software Architect - Intel System Software Products



--
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals