Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Paul Hsieh, post: 1672794"] Yes I did. I noticed that none answered the real question of the author, which is precisely *WHY* I chimed in. Why let this newsgroups pervasive pedanticness ruin everyone's day? First of all, the concept of "constructor" and "destructors" are not unique to C++. The bstring library ([URL]http://bstring.sf.net[/URL] ) has them, even in the C interface, for example. They are a programming concept, as much as a mechanism that C++ has built-in support for. Saying C doesn't have constructors or destructors is like saying it doesn't have bubble sort. Second of all, the the analogy between malloc/free and new/delete is obvious. For someone interested in the knowlege of both it doesn't make sense to state something about one and leave out the information for the other. Yes. And pointing this out has no value to anyone. Let alone repeating it multiple times. He is not asking questions about the standard. And this is not comp.std.c. So what relevance does this useless observation have to anything? Have you read all the EULAs for all the software you've installed? Are you a moderator for this newsgroup? Do you think every post in comp.lang.c follows the charter? Do you think there is any value to this charter? Do you think the many other posts which did nothing more than rip into the OP for not following this newsgroups valueless charter is useful? So why did I do it? Because I decided not to be a *PRICK*. Unlikely. I can get a sense of what the charter is from the kind of crap the regulars post here. That's like asking me to read the Unibomber's Manifesto to have a more detailed understanding of why he mailed bombs to people. [/QUOTE]

Verification