From:	Paul Shirley <Paul AT chocolat DOT obvious DOT fake DOT foobar DOT co DOT uk>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Freeing static vars
Date:	Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:50:36 +0000
Organization:	wot? me?
Lines:	12
Message-ID:	<elW94GAsQj20Ewph@foobar.co.uk>
References:	<199802050138 DOT RAA05569 AT adit DOT ap DOT net>
	<3 DOT 0 DOT 5 DOT 32 DOT 19980205125943 DOT 007b3180 AT math DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	chocolat.foobar.co.uk
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

In article <3 DOT 0 DOT 5 DOT 32 DOT 19980205125943 DOT 007b3180 AT math DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>, Maciej
Radziejewski <maciejr AT math DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl> writes
>Perhaps it is too obvious to write, but isn't this accomplished in C++
>by defining a local scope and declaring the variables inside it?
>The variables will be destroyed upon leaving the local scope.

1st: they are only static if you mark them 'static'
2nd: static variables are not destroyed on leaving a scope (thats the
meaning of static after all!), only the name is hidden.

---
Paul Shirley: my email address is 'obvious'ly anti-spammed

- Raw text -