[Bug c++/72768] Potential bug about the order of destructors of static objects and atexit() callbacks in C++?

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72768

--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> It is necessary for correctness that destructors are run for objects which
> have completed a constructor. It is not necessary for correctness to order
> static destructors after the destructor for an object still being

Oops, I meant atexit callbacks, not static destructors.