"Andreas Huber" <ah2003@[...].net>  writes:

> > Furthermore, it
> > seems as though, if you want that behavior, it's trivial to get it by
> > wrapping the FSM in a derived class whose destructor finalizes the
> > state machine.
> 
>  Yes, but only at the cost of making the current interface (and
>  implementation) more complex (we'd need to have at least a separate
>  exit() function, right?).

No.  At the moment we're just talking about whether A1 is justified.
Whether or not exit actions should use destructors is a separate
question.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost