[Octave-patch-tracker] [patch #10366] Same destructor order for octave_value:s in frame in std::vector for libstdc++ and libc++

[Markus Mützel]

Follow-up Comment #1, patch #10366 (project octave):

If the order in which the destructors are executed really doesn't matter, it
might be better (from a maintenance and code simplicity point of view) to
adapt the BIST instead imho.

However, if there are cases where the order of destructor execution might
matter, it might be better to have the same order with the tree based
evaluator and with the VM.

Do you have any hints on that?



    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?10366>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/