Change Details

The constructor does initialize `g_Logger` and the destructor resets it. Previously `g_Logger` was reset to `nullptr`. Now it's reset to the previous `CLogger` (the `nullLogger`). Now the `CLogger` is stored on the stack instead of dynamic memory. The message "Engine exited successfully" might be logged even if an exception is thrown. That can be change using `std::current_exception`. I strive to introduse such "guards" for more globals. Which is the best name: - `LifetimeGuard` It manages the lifetime of an external object. - `InitGuard` Other such classes might not be about lifetime. - `ScopedLifetime` Because it does something on scope exit. - `ScopedGuard` one might think it's a combination of `std::scoped_lock` and `std::lock_guard`. Should it be `CLogger::LifetimeGuard` or `LifetimeGuard<CLogger>`? Should it be explicitly non-moveable? It doesn't make a difference in this case but it might make in others...

The constructor does initialize `g_Logger` and the destructor resets it. Previously `g_Logger` was reset to `nullptr`. Now it's reset to the previous `CLogger` (the `nullLogger`). Now the `CLogger` is stored on the stack instead of dynamic memory. The message "Engine exited successfully" might be logged even if an exception is thrown. That can be change using `std::uncaught_exceptions`. I strive to introduse such "guards" for more globals. Which is the best name: - `LifetimeGuard` It manages the lifetime of an external object. - `InitGuard` Other such classes might not be about lifetime. - `ScopedLifetime` Because it does something on scope exit. - `ScopedGuard` one might think it's a combination of `std::scoped_lock` and `std::lock_guard`. Should it be `CLogger::LifetimeGuard` or `LifetimeGuard<CLogger>`? Should it be explicitly non-moveable? It doesn't make a difference in this case but it might make in others...

The constructor does initialize `g_Logger` and the destructor resets it. Previously `g_Logger` was reset to `nullptr`. Now it's reset to the previous `CLogger` (the `nullLogger`). Now the `CLogger` is stored on the stack instead of dynamic memory. The message "Engine exited successfully" might be logged even if an exception is thrown. That can be change using `std::currenuncaught_exception`s`. I strive to introduse such "guards" for more globals. Which is the best name: - `LifetimeGuard` It manages the lifetime of an external object. - `InitGuard` Other such classes might not be about lifetime. - `ScopedLifetime` Because it does something on scope exit. - `ScopedGuard` one might think it's a combination of `std::scoped_lock` and `std::lock_guard`. Should it be `CLogger::LifetimeGuard` or `LifetimeGuard<CLogger>`? Should it be explicitly non-moveable? It doesn't make a difference in this case but it might make in others...