On 10/22/2014 08:45 AM, eles wrote:> C++ versions:
>
> { //displays ~C~B~A
> A foo;
> B bar;
> C *caz = new C();
> delete caz;
> }
>
> std::cout << std::endl;
>
> { //displays ~C~B~A
> std::unique_ptr<A> foo = std::make_unique<A>();
> std::unique_ptr<B> bar = std::make_unique<B>();
> C *caz = new C();
> delete caz;
> }
>
>
> D version:
>
> { //displays ~A~B~C
> A foo = scoped!(A)();
> B bar = scoped!(B)();
> C caz = new C();
> destroy(caz);
> }
>
> Why the objects are not destroyed in the inverse order of their
> creation? Case in point, destroying foo releases a lock for bar and caz.
I confirm this. If you put writeln() expressions inside typecons.scoped,
you will realize that the destroys are happening right after each scoped
line:
constructed A
destroying
~A
constructed B
destroying
~B
~C
Extremely dangerous and very tricky! The solution? Define the objects as
'auto' (or 'const', etc.), which you want anyway:
auto foo = scoped!(A)();
auto bar = scoped!(B)();
You do not want to be left with A or B. You want Scoped!A and Scoped!B.
Ali
