"Andrei Alexandrescu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Once again, the case was:
>>
>> {
>> aligned_storage<T>::type storage;
>>
>> new ((void*)&storage) T(x, y, z); // throws
>>
>> // ~aligned_storage<T>() destroys non-existent T
>> }
>
> You mean "~aligned_storage<T>::type() destroys non-existent T"?
Actually, I meant this:
{
aligned_storage<T> storage;
new ((void*)&storage.bytes) T(x, y, z); // throws
// ~aligned_storage<T>() destroys non-existent T
}
Phillipe was proposing to give ~aligned_storage<T> responsibility for
destroying the contained object, which doesn't work, no matter how
you (mis)spell it ;-)
--
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
