D - destructor of base class
- Pavel Minayev (4/4) Feb 01 2002 ...how do I call it? I've tried ~super() and super.~this(), but
- Ruslanas Abdrachimovas (4/11) Feb 01 2002 D is GARBAGE COLLECTED... That means: destructors called only from
- Mike Wynn (15/26) Feb 01 2002 And I believe D automatically calls your super destructor
- Pavel Minayev (7/9) Feb 01 2002 Nope, I've tested it of course before writing =)
- Ruslanas Abdrachimovas (71/110) Feb 01 2002 I wrote some examples with construction of two objects of child and base...
- Pavel Minayev (9/11) Feb 01 2002 It doesn't matter. Destructor is something that gets called
- Walter (4/15) Feb 01 2002 To explicitly call the destructor, use the delete operator. I'll look in...
- Pavel Minayev (4/6) Feb 01 2002 Great, so now we can completely control life-cycle of our objects!
- Walter (4/10) Feb 01 2002 into
- Walter (11/15) Feb 04 2002 Ok, I've fixed it so the super destructor gets called automatically when...
...how do I call it? I've tried ~super() and super.~this(), but no luck. It seems to dislike the very idea of call to destructor, in general, for example, I can't even do ~this() - and I could in C++...
Feb 01 2002
D is GARBAGE COLLECTED... That means: destructors called only from garbage collector... No DELETE and no stack objects. =] Ruslanas Pavel Minayev wrote:...how do I call it? I've tried ~super() and super.~this(), but no luck. It seems to dislike the very idea of call to destructor, in general, for example, I can't even do ~this() - and I could in C++...
Feb 01 2002
And I believe D automatically calls your super destructor if not it should. This has reminded me of the fun Java VM vendors have with Java's finalise method. What does D do if I put a reference to my object into a static of some other class, or globally visuable Object from my destructor ? being that the destructor should only be called once (so the docs say) but I have just make a dieing object live again, very bad I know, but will it get called again, or will it be destroyed and cause a seggy later. D does not have Soft or Weak references, I forsee people wanting to revive objects that are about to be deleted if they've not been live for long (caching etc). Mike. "Ruslanas Abdrachimovas" <anubis 03bar.ktu.lt> wrote in message news:3C5AB1CA.601 03bar.ktu.lt...D is GARBAGE COLLECTED... That means: destructors called only from garbage collector... No DELETE and no stack objects. =] Ruslanas Pavel Minayev wrote:...how do I call it? I've tried ~super() and super.~this(), but no luck. It seems to dislike the very idea of call to destructor, in general, for example, I can't even do ~this() - and I could in C++...
Feb 01 2002
"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> "Mike Wynn" <mike.wynn l8night.co.uk> wrote in message news:a3eeev$vbg$1 digitaldaemon.com...And I believe D automatically calls your super destructorNope, I've tested it of course before writing =)if not it should.I see two solutions here: one to insert it automatically at the end of destructor, the other is to let the programmer put it wherever he wants, but the call _must_ happen. This is the same I proposed for constructors.
Feb 01 2002
I wrote some examples with construction of two objects of child and base
classes, there one of them:
....
import object;
class A
{
private int val;
protected int vA;
public this(int v)
{
val = v;
printf("Class A constructor [%d]\n", val);
init();
}
private void init()
{
vA = 999;
printf("Class A init [%d]\n", val);
}
public void print(char[] str)
{
printf("vA=[%d] str=[%s]\n", vA, (char*)str);
}
public ~this()
{
printf("Class A destructor [%d]\n", val);
}
}
class B : A
{
private int val;
public this(int v)
{
val = v;
printf("Class B constructor [%d]\n", val);
init();
super(v); // construct base class
}
private void init()
{
printf("Class B init [%d]\n", val);
}
public ~this()
{
printf("Class B destructor [%d]\n", val);
}
}
int main(char[][] args)
{
printf("Prog begin\n");
for (int i = 0; i < args.length; ++i)
{
printf("%d = [%s]\n", i, (char*)args[i]);
}
printf("-------------------------------\n");
A a = new A(0);
B b = new B(1);
b.print("Call to super class's method");
printf("-------------------------------\n");
printf("Prog end\n");
return 0;
}
....
We should see two calls to A destructor (for a and for b - if D
automatically calls super destructor), but if You try, You will see only
one =) ... D doesn't call superdestructor automatically, but I think, it
frees memory of super class. ;)
Ruslanas
Mike Wynn wrote:
And I believe D automatically calls your super destructor
if not it should.
This has reminded me of the fun Java VM vendors have with Java's finalise
method.
What does D do if I put a reference to my object into a static of some other
class, or globally visuable Object from my destructor ?
being that the destructor should only be called once (so the docs say) but I
have just make a dieing object live again, very bad I know, but will it get
called again, or will it be destroyed and cause a seggy later.
D does not have Soft or Weak references, I forsee people wanting to revive
objects that are about to be deleted if they've not been live for long
(caching etc).
Mike.
"Ruslanas Abdrachimovas" <anubis 03bar.ktu.lt> wrote in message
news:3C5AB1CA.601 03bar.ktu.lt...
D is GARBAGE COLLECTED... That means: destructors called only from
garbage collector... No DELETE and no stack objects. =]
Ruslanas
Pavel Minayev wrote:
...how do I call it? I've tried ~super() and super.~this(), but
no luck. It seems to dislike the very idea of call to destructor,
in general, for example, I can't even do ~this() - and I could
in C++...
Feb 01 2002
"Ruslanas Abdrachimovas" <anubis 03bar.ktu.lt> wrote in message news:3C5AB1CA.601 03bar.ktu.lt...D is GARBAGE COLLECTED... That means: destructors called only from garbage collector... No DELETE and no stack objects. =]It doesn't matter. Destructor is something that gets called when object is deleted - whether you use delete or the GC removes it (BTW there _is_ delete in D!). Since destructor is practically just a virtual method, the very idea of OOP demands it to be callable from derived classes. C++ does this, so does Object Pascal... but not D (yet?). And this has nothing to do with GCing.
Feb 01 2002
"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message news:a3egc4$10bm$1 digitaldaemon.com..."Ruslanas Abdrachimovas" <anubis 03bar.ktu.lt> wrote in message news:3C5AB1CA.601 03bar.ktu.lt...To explicitly call the destructor, use the delete operator. I'll look into the bug where the super destructor is not happening!D is GARBAGE COLLECTED... That means: destructors called only from garbage collector... No DELETE and no stack objects. =]It doesn't matter. Destructor is something that gets called when object is deleted - whether you use delete or the GC removes it (BTW there _is_ delete in D!). Since destructor is practically just a virtual method, the very idea of OOP demands it to be callable from derived classes. C++ does this, so does Object Pascal... but not D (yet?). And this has nothing to do with GCing.
Feb 01 2002
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:a3er6r$sr$2 digitaldaemon.com...To explicitly call the destructor, use the delete operator. I'll look intoGreat, so now we can completely control life-cycle of our objects!the bug where the super destructor is not happening!So it is supposed to be called automatically?
Feb 01 2002
"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message news:a3eru5$vn$1 digitaldaemon.com..."Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:a3er6r$sr$2 digitaldaemon.com...intoTo explicitly call the destructor, use the delete operator. I'll lookGreat, so now we can completely control life-cycle of our objects!I don't know yet. <g>the bug where the super destructor is not happening!So it is supposed to be called automatically?
Feb 01 2002
"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message news:a3ea7t$suh$1 digitaldaemon.com......how do I call it? I've tried ~super() and super.~this(), but no luck. It seems to dislike the very idea of call to destructor, in general, for example, I can't even do ~this() - and I could in C++...Ok, I've fixed it so the super destructor gets called automatically when the destructor finishes. There's no way to call it explicitly. The obvious question is, why is this not symmetrical with the way super constructors are called (they're called explicitly in the constructor)? The reason is because there can be many different super constructors with different argument lists, and sometimes things must be computed before even passing arguments to the super constructor. Destructors must get called, but there can be only one (!), and so the runtime system calls it automatically.
Feb 04 2002