Re: Iterator approach (was: List container strawman 1.3)

[Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com>]

In article <M4OP7.1278$L51.9683@rwcrnsc54>, Mark Lundquist says...
>
>OK, so I shouldn't have said it was safe under "any" circumstance permitted
>by the language...

Dynamic deallocation isn't exactly some bizzare rarely-used feature.

>I guess my view is that using Unchecked_Deallocation is like signing a
>waiver that says "I accept full responsibility for whatever happens". 

.. to that object, yes. The situation we are talking about is that nasty things
happen to *other* objects as well, because we have purposely designed things in
a way that allows that. If we want to take the attitude that it is the user's
responsibility to keep iterators and lists consistent, than we can take that
attitude. If instead we want to take the attitude that its the package's
responsibility then we can take that attitude. I think trying to take some
middle ground is dangerous.


---
T.E.D.    homepage   - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. 
However a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.