Re: delete vs delete[]
- From: "Ben Voigt" <rbv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 08:28:55 -0500
"Carl Daniel [VC++ MVP]" <cpdaniel_remove_this_and_nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote in message news:O5a9A9CnHHA.404@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Alex Blekhman wrote:
Carl Daniel [VC++ MVP] wrote:
bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
I was just wondering why the compiler won't warn you when you try to
do this:
TCHAR *t = new TCHAR[20];
delete t;
A fair question - I can't see any reason why the compiler couldn't
warn in a case like this. Of course, in real programs, there's
likely to be a much greater distance between the allocation and the
deallocation, which would make generating an error or warning
considerably harder.
I think, it is because the task of a compiler is to check
syntactical correctness of a code, while it's up to
developer to check logical correctness. However, Team System
edition of VC++ has handy "/analyze" compiler option, which
besides other checks, attempts to detect new/delete
mismatch. See, for example, warnings C6278, C6283.
I guess my wording was too clever for my own good :) There's lots of
reasons why a compiler _wouldn't_ warn on something like this, but no
reason why it _couldn't_.
It is much more appropriate for tools like lint or team system's /analyze
to detect stuff like this, definitely!
Why? The only reason I can see (not an invalid one to be sure) is so MS and
others can make money charging extra for the advanced analysis. Certainly
most warnings now emitted by the compiler were once the responsibility of
lint. I don't think anyone would now argue having them in lint is "much
more appropriate".
-cd
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: delete vs delete[]
- From: Alex Blekhman
- Re: delete vs delete[]
- References:
- delete vs delete[]
- From: bob
- Re: delete vs delete[]
- From: Carl Daniel [VC++ MVP]
- Re: delete vs delete[]
- From: Alex Blekhman
- Re: delete vs delete[]
- From: Carl Daniel [VC++ MVP]
- delete vs delete[]
- Prev by Date: Re: C++ quirks - frustrated with secure CRT [long]
- Next by Date: Re: write to file with no used of buffered-IO functions
- Previous by thread: Re: delete vs delete[]
- Next by thread: Re: delete vs delete[]
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
