- Title
- Is a class with a declared but not defined destructor a POD?
- Status
- cd1
- Section
- Clause [11] [class]
- Submitter
- Gennaro Prota
Created on 2002-09-18.00:00:00 last changed 217 months ago
Messages
Date: 2004-03-15.00:00:00
[Voted into WP at March 2004 meeting.]
Date: 2003-04-15.00:00:00
Proposed resolution (April 2003):
Replace in Clause 11 [class] paragraph 4 Drafting note: The changes are shown relative to TC1, incorporating
the changes from the resolution of
core issue 148.
A POD-struct is an aggregate class that has no non-static data
members of type non-POD-struct, non-POD-union (or array of such types)
or reference, and has no user-
defined declared
copy assignment operator and no user-defined
declared destructor. Similarly, a POD-union is an
aggregate union that has no non-static data members of type
non-POD-struct, non-POD-union (or array of such types) or reference,
and has no user-defined declared copy
assignment operator and no user-defined
declared destructor.
Date: 2020-12-15.00:00:00
The standard (Clause 11 [class] par. 4) says that
"A POD-struct is an aggregate class
that has no non-static data members of type non-POD-struct,
non-POD-union (or array of such types) or reference, and has no
user-defined copy assignment operator and no user-defined destructor." Note that it says 'user-defined', not 'user-declared'. Is it the
intent that if e.g. a copy assignment operator is declared but not
defined, this does not (per se) prevent the class to be a POD-struct?
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008-10-05 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: wp -> cd1 |
| 2004-04-09 00:00:00 | admin | set | messages: + msg1013 |
| 2004-04-09 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: ready -> wp |
| 2003-11-15 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: review -> ready |
| 2003-04-25 00:00:00 | admin | set | messages: + msg825 |
| 2003-04-25 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: open -> review |
| 2002-09-18 00:00:00 | admin | create | |