Subj : Re: Can you mimic atexit() for class functions?
To   : borland.public.cpp.borlandcpp
From : "Ed Mulroy [TeamB]" <dont_email_me@bitbuc.ket>
Date : Thu Oct 09 2003 01:17 am

From a quick look

Automatic variables (5.5.2.4, 3.7.2).
Items for which delete is called (3.7.3)
Temporaries returned from a function (5.5.2.4, 12.2.5)
Globals (3.6.3)

All of these things that I mentioned are a consequence of how C++ works and
are not arbitrarily decided in the standard.  It is obvious that without
what I told you occurring then the language would be inconsistent.

You asked for help and I gave it.  You then argue and decide that the
standard doesn't tell of these things.  Why should it fall to me to read you
the standard?  Get a copy for yourself http://webstore.ansi.org/ or operate
from the April '95 draft working paper
http://www.csci.csusb.edu/dick/c++std/april/index.html


..  Ed


> Benjamin Pratt wrote in message
> news:3f84d069$1@newsgroups.borland.com...
>
> This may be the order BC destructs its objects, but I'm pretty
> sure that the standard does not define a destruction order, as
> Jeff stated. Please point me to the reference in the standard if
> I'm wrong. (It would be nice if I am wrong, since cleanup would
> be easier)

.