Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!mephisto!mcnc!decvax.dec.com!zinn!nuucp
From: mjv@objects.mv.com (Michael J. Vilot)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: C++ coding standards (Comment needed)
Message-ID: <883@zinn.MV.COM>
Date: 23 Aug 90 23:44:05 GMT
Sender: nuucp@zinn.MV.COM
Lines: 39

Roger Scott mentions:
> I wouldn't mind the ability to un-declare a variable after I am "done"
I use blocks to achieve this effect.  I also rely more on expressions and
less on explicit intermediate variables.

I sometimes use objects of classes that only provide constructors and
destructors.  I use them only for their side-effects.  Here's a simple
example:

	class Timer {
	  time_t start;
	public:
	  Timer();	// records start
	 ~Timer();	// computes elapsed, displays it on cerr
	};

	void f()
	{
	  // do some work

	  {
	    Timer t;

	    // do some timed work, and report the time at block exit
	  }

	  // etc.
	}

The Timer object `t' is only active in the inner block.  Of course, the
object is apparently never used, so I may get into trouble with those
building aggressively-optimizing compilers.

I hope such optimizations allow this use of constructor/destructor
side-effects.

--
Mike Vilot,  ObjectWare Inc, Nashua NH
mjv@objects.mv.com  (UUCP:  ...!decvax!zinn!objects!mjv)