On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 00:33:11 +0300, Andrei Alexandrescu
<seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:
That's a great point. So we're in good shape: we leave the object in a
well-defined state that allocates no resources and is distinguished from
all valid states.
By the way, what would be the problem with making "delete" do this
(instead of deprecating and removing it)?
Asking because of two reasons:
1) I think that custom class allocators/deallocators[1] are a great
feature, which require the "delete" keyword.
2) "delete foo" looks much nicer and coherent with other similar languages
than "clear(foo)".
[1]: http://digitalmars.com/d/2.0/memory.html#newdelete
--
Best regards,
Vladimir mailto:vladi...@thecybershadow.net
