<HTML>
<HEAD>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>
    CWG Issue 1605</TITLE>
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0">
<STYLE TYPE="text/css">
  INS { text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; background-color:#A0FFA0 }
  .INS { text-decoration:none; background-color:#D0FFD0 }
  DEL { text-decoration:line-through; background-color:#FFA0A0 }
  .DEL { text-decoration:line-through; background-color: #FFD0D0 }
  @media (prefers-color-scheme: dark) {
    HTML { background-color:#202020; color:#f0f0f0; }
    A { color:#5bc0ff; }
    A:visited { color:#c6a8ff; }
    A:hover, a:focus { color:#afd7ff; }
    INS { background-color:#033a16; color:#aff5b4; }
    .INS { background-color: #033a16; }
    DEL { background-color:#67060c; color:#ffdcd7; }
    .DEL { background-color:#67060c; }
  }
  SPAN.cmnt { font-family:Times; font-style:italic }
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><EM>This is an unofficial snapshot of the ISO/IEC JTC1 SC22 WG21
  Core Issues List revision 118b.
  See http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/ for the official
  list.</EM></P>
<P>2025-09-28</P>
<HR>
<A NAME="1605"></A><H4>1605.
  
Misleading parenthetical comment for explicit destructor call
</H4>
<B>Section: </B>11.4.7&#160; [<A href="https://wg21.link/class.dtor">class.dtor</A>]
 &#160;&#160;&#160;

 <B>Status: </B>CD3
 &#160;&#160;&#160;

 <B>Submitter: </B>Mike Miller
 &#160;&#160;&#160;

 <B>Date: </B>2013-01-13<BR>


<P>[Moved to DR at the April, 2013 meeting.]</P>

<P>According to 11.4.7 [<A href="https://wg21.link/class.dtor#13">class.dtor</A>] paragraph 13,</P>

<BLOCKQUOTE>

The invocation of a destructor is subject to the usual rules for
member functions (11.4.2 [<A href="https://wg21.link/class.mfct">class.mfct</A>]), that is, if the object is
not of the destructor's class type and not of a class derived from the
destructor's class type, the program has undefined behavior (except
that invoking <TT>delete</TT> on a null pointer has no effect).

</BLOCKQUOTE>

<P>While true, the final parenthetical comment concerns a
<I>delete-expression</I>, not an explicit destructor call.  Its
presence here could mislead a careless reader to think that invoking
a destructor with a null pointer is harmless.  It should be deleted.</P>

<P><B>Proposed resolution (February, 2013):</B></P>

<P>Change 11.4.7 [<A href="https://wg21.link/class.dtor#13">class.dtor</A>] paragraph 13 as follows:</P>

<BLOCKQUOTE>

In an explicit destructor call, the destructor name appears as a <TT>~</TT>
followed by a <I>type-name</I> or <I>decltype-specifier</I> that denotes
the destructor's class type. The invocation of a destructor is subject to
the usual rules for member functions
(11.4.2 [<A href="https://wg21.link/class.mfct">class.mfct</A>])<DEL>,</DEL><INS>;</INS> that is, if the object
is not of the destructor's class type and not of a class derived from the
destructor's class type <INS>(including when the destructor is invoked via
a null pointer value)</INS>, the program has undefined
behavior <DEL>(except that invoking delete on a null pointer has no
effect)</DEL>. <INS>[<I>Note:</I> invoking <TT>delete</TT> on a null
pointer does not call the destructor; see
7.6.2.9 [<A href="https://wg21.link/expr.delete">expr.delete</A>]. &#8212;<I>end note</I>]</INS>
[<I>Example:</I>...

</BLOCKQUOTE>

<BR><BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>
