Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!spool.mu.edu!news.cs.indiana.edu!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!gorilla.ecn.purdue.edu!helz
From: helz@gorilla.ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: an object killing itself.
Message-ID: <1991Jun9.080138.2540@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>
Date: 9 Jun 91 08:01:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: noose.1991Jun9.080138.2540
Sender: root@noose.ecn.purdue.edu (ECN System Management)
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Lines: 35

Hey net.c++.wisepersons...
I have an application where it would be very convenient for a member
function to be able to do the equivelent of deleting the object it is
a member of, as shown in the following code:

-------cut-here------------------------------------------

#include <stdio.h>

class depressed{
    int i;
 public:
    hara_kiri(){
	printf("Goodbye Cruel World....BANG!!!\n");
	delete this;
	printf("thunk!\n");
    }
};

depressed *b;

main(){
    b=new depressed;
    b->hara_kiri();
    printf("Back in the main program.\n");
}

----cut-here------------------------------------------

Is this OK?  I never reference any data from the object again--I
simple want the return from the member function hara_kiri() to go as
planned.  Would it still be OK if hara_kiri(), instead of deleting the
object itself, called another function which deleted the object?

Thanks in advance for wadeing through the code.