🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <MATT.95Sep13110057@physics2.Berkeley.EDU>
clamage@Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Clamage) writes:
>I haven't found any contradictory statements about this in the WP,
>including what you referenced in the original article. The WP does
>not mention all the possibilities in each place where it talks
>about deallocation, so perhaps that is confusing. But if you do
>find wording that seems contradictory or is in particular confusing
>(as opposed to the subject being confusing), please let me know,
>or post it here.

I certainly found the public draft confusing in this regard.  Although
the term "placement delete" is used in a couple of places, I found no
clear definition of the term, nor was there a corresponding entry in
the index.  [basic.stc.dynamic.deallocation] (3.7.3.2) only mentions
"placement delete" in reference to delete(void*,size_t);
[expr.new](5.3.4), in turn, seems to refer to 3.7.3.2 for a definition
of "placement delete".  Now that I know what I'm looking for, I
suppose that all the definitions are there to be inferred, but they're
hard to see if you don't already know what they're going to say.

-David
-- 
============================================================================
David Wald      http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~wald/     wald@theory.lcs.mit.edu
   "Blessed are the peacocks, for they shall be called sonship of God"
             -- Matt 5:9, from a faulty QuickVerse 2.0
============================================================================

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]