This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C++: why implicit delete in destructor?
- To: Mike Harrold <mharrold at cas dot org>
- Subject: Re: C++: why implicit delete in destructor?
- From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 14:47:23 +0100
- CC: Jason Merrill <jason_merrill at redhat dot com>, Olaf Dietsche <olaf dot dietsche--list dot gcc-patches at exmail dot de>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: Codesourcery LLC
- References: <200105011336.JAA11110@mah21awu.cas.org>
Mike Harrold wrote:
> > Because for virtual destructors, if the dynamic type of the class defines
> > operator delete, we need to use that instead of the global one.
> > For non-virtual destructors, as of 3.0 we won't call delete from the
> > destructor.
> I guess the question is why these are in the destructor?
Huh? This discussion is getting more and more confused.
The ABI has changed. we're not interested in fiddling with the old abi.
The new abi is documented at http://www.codesourcery.com/cxx-abi/
Please read that, before coming back with more ABI related questions. Also
for this particular point please read 22.214.171.124 and 5.3.5 of the standard.
We are extremely interested in bugs in the new abi (both design bugs and
implementation bugs), as we need to get those eliminated before 3.0 comes
Dr Nathan Sidwell :: http://www.codesourcery.com :: CodeSourcery LLC
'But that's a lie.' - 'Yes it is. What's your point?'
email@example.com : http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~nathan/ : firstname.lastname@example.org