Skip to main content

Dfference between delete and delete[]

There's a common myth among Visual C++ programmers that it's OK to use delete instead of delete [] to release arrays built-in types. For example,
int *p = new int[10];
delete p; // very bad; should be: delete[] p
This is totally wrong. The C++ standard specifically says that using delete to release dynamically allocated arrays of any type—including built-in types—yields undefined behavior. The fact that on some platforms apps that use delete instead of delete [] don't crash can be attributed to sheer luck: Visual C++, for example, implements both delete and delete [] for built-in types by calling free(). However, there is no guarantee that future releases of Visual C++ will adhere to this convention. Furthermore, there's no guarantees that this will work with other compilers. To conclude, using delete instead of delete[] and vice versa is a very bad programming habit that should be avoided.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Explain Polymorphism and Flavors of Polymorphism...

Polymorphism is the ability of different objects to react in an individual manner to the same message. This notion was imported from natural languages. For example, the verb "to close" means different things when applied to different objects. Closing a door, closing a bank account, or closing a program's window are all different actions; their exact meaning is determined by the object on which the action is performed. Most object-oriented languages implement polymorphism only in the form of virtual functions. But C++ has two more mechanisms of static (meaning: compile-time) polymorphism: Operator overloading. Applying the += operator to integers or string objects, for example, is interpreted by each of these objects in an individual manner. Obviously, the underlying implementation of += differs in every type. Yet, intuitively, we can predict what results are. Templates. A vector of integers, for example, reacts differently from a vector of string objects when it receives ...
17 comments
Read more

Function name mangling for C++ and Java

G++ internals - Mangling Both C++ and Jave provide overloaded function and methods, which are methods with the same types but different parameter lists. Selecting the correct version is done at compile time. Though the overloaded functions have the same name in the source code, they need to be translated into different assembler-level names, since typical assemblers and linkers cannot handle overloading. This process of encoding the parameter types with the method name into a unique name is called name mangling . The inverse process is called demangling . It is convenient that C++ and Java use compatible mangling schemes, since the makes life easier for tools such as gdb, and it eases integration between C++ and Java. Note there is also a standard "Jave Native Interface" (JNI) which implements a different calling convention, and uses a different mangling scheme. The JNI is a rather abstract ABI so Java can call methods written in C or C++; we are concerned he...
5 comments
Read more