Re: Is it legal (as opposed to sensible) to explicitly destruct an object and deallocate the memory?

From:

Stuart Golodetz <blah@blah.com>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++

Date:

Sun, 12 Dec 2010 16:48:09 +0000

Message-ID:

<ie2uc4$97p$1@speranza.aioe.org>

On 12/12/2010 16:28, ?? Tiib wrote:

On Dec 12, 5:51 pm, Stuart Golodetz<b...@blah.com> wrote:

Hi all,

Just feeling curious -- I know the following is ill-advised, but is it
actually formally illegal?

#include<iostream>

struct X
{
         ~X()
         {
                 std::cout<< "~X()\n";
         }

};

int main()
{
         X *x = new X;
         //delete x;
         x->~X();
         ::operator delete(x);
         return 0;

}

It would certainly be legal in the context of *placement* new, but is
there a requirement in the standard that all "new"s are matched by
"delete"s, rather than "operator delete"s?

It feels legal. It is doing all same things in same order what simple
'delete x;' is doing by standard.

Thanks -- I think I'd expect it to work, just curious because it's the
sort of thing that might be formally undefined for some reason that I
haven't come across.

Stu

Re: Is it *legal* (as opposed to sensible) to explicitly destruct an object and deallocate the memory?

Re: Is it legal (as opposed to sensible) to explicitly destruct an object and deallocate the memory?