From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-30 07:23:32
"Andreas Huber" <ah2003_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> Furthermore, it
>> seems as though, if you want that behavior, it's trivial to get it by
>> wrapping the FSM in a derived class whose destructor finalizes the
>> state machine.
> Yes, but only at the cost of making the current interface (and
> implementation) more complex (we'd need to have at least a separate
> exit() function, right?).
No. At the moment we're just talking about whether A1 is justified.
Whether or not exit actions should use destructors is a separate
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk