"delete" means "from memory", not "from container" in C++. In particular, "delete member of object" leaves the object in an inconsistent state, unless the member is already NULL, and therefore such a construct should never be used. The analogy is very inappropriate.
Chris -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brady Eidson Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 1:53 AM To: Geoffrey Garen Cc: Maciej Stachowiak; WHATWG Mailing List Subject: Re: [whatwg] WebIDL vs HTML5 storage changes > To give you an analogy, even in C++, where you're allowed to > overload operator delete, if you overloaded operator delete to mean > "do not free this object's memory, but do delete the file it > references from the file system", well, let's just say that your > patch would not pass code review with any of your four reviewers :). But if you overloaded the delete operator to free the object's memory *and* delete its referenced files from the file system, you'd be using the operator overloading in its intended capacity.