Boost logo

Boost :

From: Shankar Sai (sai.shankar_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-03 22:31:48

|> >
|> > That is the idiom I was talking about.
|> Then there shouldn't be a problem. Declaring '~C' in 'C'
|> and placing the
|> definition for 'C::~C' below the definition for 'Cimpl'
|> causes 'Cimpl' to be
|> a complete type at the point where
|> 'scoped_ptr<Cimpl>::~scoped_ptr' is
|> called. 'Cimpl' doesn't even need a trivial destructor.

What if ~C (and/or ~CImpl) is trivial because of scoped_ptr and I don't
declare/define it currently? In this case, where would ~C (and
consequently ~Cimpl) be instantiated?


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at