On 2014-11-01 01:54, Michel Fortin wrote:
I can't remember if this is an oversight or just something that I hadn't got to yet. In my mind this was already done.
I did a grep for "dealloc" and couldn't find anything related.
Anyway, the answer is *yes*: the destructor should be mapped to the "dealloc" selector. It should also implicitly call the destructor for any struct within the object and call it's superclass's destructor (if present), the usual D semantics for a destructor (that part might already work actually).
-- /Jacob Carlborg
