Re: [Dev-C++] singleton pattern implementation.

On 9/27/07, Per Westermark <pw...@ia...> wrote:
> Only embedded-system operating systems should/may be unable to reclaim all
> memory after a program/task has ended.
>
> However, there are other issues with not calling an object destructor. The
> object may contain other resources that are not reclaimable by the OS. For
> example, the object may use temporary files that should be removed by the
> destructor. Or the object could control aspects of some hardware.

I've always been told to never trust anything to clean up your memory
for you.  It'll probably leave me to clean up a lot of memory when I
don't need to, but learning how to deal with memory, with particular
regards to scope and when things come in and out of scope, will never
hurt IMHO.

-- 
Registered Linux Addict #431495
If You Know What's Good For You, You'll Install Linux
John 3:16!