Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!pluto.hemel.bull.co.uk!pmoore
From: pmoore@hemel.bull.co.uk (Paul Moore)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: conditional scope and destructors results
Message-ID: <1990Nov29.173406.19416@hemel.bull.co.uk>
Date: 29 Nov 90 17:34:06 GMT
References: <1990Nov13.114958.20853@hemel.bull.co.uk> <329@tin.crc.ac.uk> <366@tin.crc.ac.uk> <13@microsoft.UUCP>
Organization: Bull HN UK
Lines: 17

jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK) writes:

>I disagree.  First, Ellis & Stroustrup do not make it clear whether this
>restriction is intended to be imposed on the programmer alone, or 
>whether this is something that it is mandatory for the compiler to 
>of languages.  However, in other than simple deterministic cases
.......

>Hopefully this is another situation where the ANSI committee will 
>clarify the rights and responsibilities of compilers verses programmers.

My personal thoughts are that the compiler must at least issue a warning.
Non trivial cases of this problem are not easy to spot and occur in what
seemed to me to be reasonbly shaped code - it took me some time to discover
my problem. I think that the days where there was a book called "all the
things that can go wrong with c but the compiler wont tell you" that you
had to read have gone.