What if I want a local to "die" before the close } of the scope in which it was created? Can I call a destructor on a local if I really want to?, C++ FAQ

C++ FAQ / Section 11 / FAQ 11.6

Section 11:

11.1	What's the deal with destructors?
11.2	What's the order that local objects are destructed?
11.3	What's the order that objects in an array are destructed?
11.4	Can I overload the destructor for my class?
11.5	Should I explicitly call a destructor on a local variable?
11.6	Can I call a destructor on a local if I really want to?
11.7	How do I handle the situation from the previous FAQ?
11.8	What if I can't wrap the local in an artificial block?
11.9	Explicitly calling dtor for objects allocated with `new`?
11.10	What is "placement `new`" and why would I use it?
11.11	Should a dtor call the dtors for member objects?
11.12	Should a dtor call the dtors for the base class subobject?
11.13	Should my destructor throw an exception when it detects a problem?
11.14	Getting `new` to allocate memory from a specific memory area?

[11.6] What if I want a local to "die" before the close } of the scope in which it was created? Can I call a destructor on a local if I really want to?

No! [For context, please read the previous FAQ].

Suppose the (desirable) side effect of destructing a local File object is to close the File. Now suppose you have an object f of a class File and you want File f to be closed before the end of the scope (i.e., the }) of the scope of object f:

void someCode()
{
  File f;

  ...code that should execute when f is still open...

  ← We want the side-effect of f's destructor here!

  ...code that should execute after f is closed...
}

There is a simple solution to this problem. But in the mean time, remember: Do not explicitly call the destructor!