|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp wrote:
> Funny, I have never thought of that.
I can see where having a stack destruct as if it's popping things could be
useful, for example. The topic came up discussing the Go "defer" bit in
another thread.
> If I had to guess, I'd say that
> the standard leaves it up to the implementation.
OK. I'll look it up if it ever comes up.
> Arrays (either stack-allocated or dynamically allocated with 'new') are,
> however, guaranteed to be constructed in the order of increasing indexes
> and destroyed in the reverse order.
Oh, so arrays do destruct. That's good to know. I guess that makes sense,
tho, now that I think about it, since the values get constructed if they
have constructors.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
C# - a language whose greatest drawback
is that its best implementation comes
from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |