From: Patrick Reilly Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Memory Problems Date: 30 Nov 1997 11:29:10 GMT Organization: gte.net Lines: 41 Message-ID: <65rim6$i2g$2@gte2.gte.net> References: <34805879 DOT 4FA AT unb DOT ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: 1cust251.tnt1.columbia.mo.da.uu.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk I'd have to see some code. Biggest things are usually: don't skip error checking (like text books do) - *know* that operator ::new() will throw an xalloc object on error, or check the return value for null (its almost always better to toss in the extra null check), and use an initialization list for constructors so that when the body of the ctor is entered all pointer members are valid (usually set to null). Note that asking in a C++ user group would provide two things: Lots of cat-calls and question-marks from people who have no idea, or are not sure, what you mean by "initialization process", "attributes", etc (or sound off for weeks about your terminology). I strongly suggest learning the correct terminology - construction (or constructor, though if you mean a constructor's initialization list that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish), data members, member functions, etc. I assume that by "initialization process" you mean construction, and that "attributes" are data members... I hope I don't sound like I'm flaming or something - I'm not. Without the correct terminology its kinda like asking a surgeon about the "sharp thing" - he may completely misunderstand what you want. Pat Neil Duxbury wrote: > > I have the following problem in the C++ program I am writing using djgpp > & rhide. Any help would be gratefully appreciated. > > Neil > > ------------- > > This problem occurs inside a class which has several attributes which > are dynamically allocated. During the initialisation process of the > class, many of these are initialised using the new command. Later on, > when this class is used, another attribute is initialised with new. When > this happens, one of the first group of attributes is "changed", > basically containing nonsense values.