5 Nov
2012
5 Nov
'12
8:08 p.m.
AMDG On 11/05/2012 01:57 AM, Peter Dimov wrote:
Andrey Semashev wrote:
Thank you Stephan for digging it out. But I still don't agree with your conclusions and consider it a serious bug.
You code just seems broken to me, sorry. It's absolutely clear that the intent of the standard as currently written is for init to be called exactly once, immediately after default construction.
+1. The requirement that init must be called before destruction doesn't make any sense if this weren't the intent. In Christ, Steven Watanabe