Title
Naming destructors
Status
cd3
Section
11.4.7 [class.dtor]
Submitter
Jamie Schmeiser

Created on 2002-04-25.00:00:00 last changed 33 months ago

Messages

Date: 2022-02-18.07:47:23

Proposed resolution:

This issue is resolved by the resolution of issue 1435.

Date: 2022-02-18.07:47:23

Note that destructors suffer from similar problems as those of constructors dealt with in issue 194 and in 263 (constructors as friends). Also, the wording in 11.4.7 [class.dtor], paragraph 1 does not permit a destructor to be defined outside of the memberlist.

Change 11.4.7 [class.dtor], paragraph 1 from

...A special declarator syntax using an optional function-specifier (9.2.3 [dcl.fct.spec]) followed by ~ followed by the destructor's class name followed by an empty parameter list is used to declare the destructor in a class definition. In such a declaration, the ~ followed by the destructor's class name can be enclosed in optional parentheses; such parentheses are ignored....

to

...A special declarator syntax using an optional sequence of function-specifiers (9.2.3 [dcl.fct.spec]), an optional friend keyword, an optional sequence of function-specifiers (9.2.3 [dcl.fct.spec]) followed by an optional :: scope-resolution-operator followed by an optional nested-name-specifier followed by ~ followed by the destructor's class name followed by an empty parameter list is used to declare the destructor. The optional nested-name-specifier shall not be specified in the declaration of a destructor within the member-list of the class of which the destructor is a member. In such a declaration, the optional :: scope-resolution-operator followed by an optional nested-name-specifier followed by ~ followed by the destructor's class name can be enclosed in optional parentheses; such parentheses are ignored....
History
Date User Action Args
2022-02-18 07:47:23adminsetmessages: + msg6682
2014-03-03 00:00:00adminsetstatus: open -> cd3
2002-04-25 00:00:00admincreate