🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9601231054.7277@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU
(Fergus Henderson) writes:

    [Concerning placement delete...]
|> The ambiguity problems could have been resolved by using a 
|> syntax such as `delete {placement parameters} pointer'.

Which, of course, would make it horribly unorthagonal with placement
new.  Unless we also change placement new to use {...} (as was the
case with early versions of g++).  Which, of course, would break so
many existing programs as to be unthinkable.

Would it be worth it to change the syntax of placement new, making the
old syntax a depricated feature (like strstream), so that we can use
the same syntax for placement delete?  (I don't particularly think it
worth the bother, but others might.)

--
James Kanze         Tel.: (+33) 88 14 49 00        email: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs-Bourgeois, F-67000 Strasbourg, France
Conseils, itudes et rialisations en logiciel orienti objet --
                -- A la recherche d'une activiti dans une region francophone
---
[ 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. ]