Re: Order of destruct of local variables

Thomas Lehmann ha scritto:
> On 21 Jul., 12:31, rkld...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>>
>> I think the standard has reference only to the order of destruction of
>> static local variables, but not so much on the order for local
>> variables with auto storage.
> 
> Don't rely on any order! This is the best choice for you to avoid
> running into undefined behaviour!

That would be very unwise. The order of destruction is guaranteed, so it
good to be aware of it and I see nothing wrong in relying on it.

> running into undefined behaviour! If you need ordered deletion than
> write a little tool class for that! I have managed it this way:
> 
> int main()
> {
>      AutoCleanup autoCleanup;
>      AB* ab = autoCleanup(new AB);
>      AC* ac = autoCleanup(new AC);
>      return 0;
> }//main
> 
> "ac" will be destroyed before "ab"!
> 

Why making things more complex that they are? What's the advantage of
this code with the more simple and obvious:

  int main()
  {
       AB ab;
       AC ac;
       return 0;
  } // "ac" will be destroyed before "ab"!

?

Just my opinion,

Ganesh

-- 
      [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm
for info about ]
      [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]