TDPL: Manual invocation of destructor

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

awishformore wrote:
> Quite frankly, I can't imagine any situation where I would ever want to 
> use the clear the way you currently intend to implement it, and if 
> you're unclear, you will probably agree that you don't really see a good 
> way to implement it as things stand.
> 
> Rather than removing delete and implementing a completely useless clear, 
> I would like to see an improved version of the GC that can correctly 
> handle delete. Maybe you are approaching the issue from the wrong 
> perspective.

If it's not easy to decide between two alternatives, choosing a third 
that's worse than either is probably not a good idea.

Regarding "correct" handling of delete by the GC - what does that mean? 
Once you define that, I'll be glad to put that behavior in clear() :o).


Andrei