| re: what are static destructors? disadvantages? .. TIA
Victor,
Thanks for your reply. I am a newbie, so was curious at the very
notion of "static destructor". Thanks again.
cheer.
K.
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:55:35 GMT, "Victor Bazarov"
<v.Abazarov@comAcast.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
><someone@somedomain.net> wrote...[color=green]
>>[/color]
>
>IIUIC, a "static destructor" is a static member function of the class
>that accepts one argument - a pointer to the object of that class to
>be destroyed. It is probably used along with "a factory method", when
>there is a need to restrict the creation of instances of some class to
>free store only and/or perform additional steps before or after
>creation of an object. Similar steps may need to be taken before
>and/or after destroying an instance. That's that the "static
>destructor" is for. I don't think it is proper to use those words
>without double quotes since there is no real destructor that is static,
>it's only a pretend destructor.
>
>Disadvantages? Compared to what? To a non-static (real) destructor?
>Hmm... I am looking for a good analogy here... What are the
>disadvantages of a sorted collection versus non-sorted one? Can you
>answer that question? Every idiom has its application. Advantages or
>disadvantages, you often just have to use a certain idiom. I guess I
>am simply trying to avoid answering that question. I really just
>don't see it as valid.
>
>V
>[/color]
| 
