home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!agate!agate!matt
- From: matt@physics16.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: destruction of temporaries
- Date: 19 Aug 92 17:02:29
- Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
- Lines: 24
- Message-ID: <MATT.92Aug19170229@physics16.berkeley.edu>
- References: <BszApE.49v@world.std.com> <1992Aug17.073500.24115@ericsson.se>
- <23466@alice.att.com> <3920@starlab.UUCP> <23487@alice.att.com>
- Reply-To: matt@physics.berkeley.edu
- NNTP-Posting-Host: physics16.berkeley.edu
- In-reply-to: ark@alice.att.com's message of 19 Aug 92 18:22:44 GMT
-
- In article <23487@alice.att.com> ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig) writes:
-
- [Very clear explanation of the problems with destruction at end of
- block omitted]
-
- > Destruction at end of block is far from a hopeless approach, but I
- > think it loses on balance. Indeed, there's something to be said for
- > almost every approach, which is why this is a knotty problem.
-
- I have to say: the more discussion I see on this issue, the better
- garbage collection is beginning to sound. These are exactly the
- problems that garbage collection resolves
-
- Unfortunately, it really isn't at all clear to me that garbage
- collection and C++ can be made to go together very well. Naively, it
- seems to me that high-quality garbage collection would be a bigger
- change to the language than high-quality exception handling.
-
- --
- Matthew Austern I dreamt I was being followed by a roving band
- (510) 644-2618 of young Republicans, all wearing the same suit,
- matt@physics.berkeley.edu taunting me and shouting, "Politically correct
- austern@theorm.lbl.gov multiculturist scum!"... They were going to make
- austern@lbl.bitnet me kiss Jesse Helms's picture when I woke up.
-