Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <79218202D4B9D4118A290002A508E13B79C391@PNZEXCHANGE>
From: Ross Smith <rosss AT pharos DOT co DOT nz>
To: "'Chan Kar Heng'" <karheng AT softhome DOT net>, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: RE: new vs malloc, was BUG - Cygwin to GNU CC compatibility
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:49:15 +1200 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

> From: Chan Kar Heng [mailto:karheng AT softhome DOT net]
> 
> <snip>
> >Well, in C++, as opposed to on earth, I suppose, you're encouraged to
> >use new and delete for all memory management in preference to malloc
> >and free. Note that in C++, a struct and a class are exactly the same
> </snip>
> 
> i'm one of those still actively using malloc/free as i often 
> use realloc
> too.
> 
> i'd gladly use new and delete if i could find an equivalent 
> of realloc()..
> ... any advice?

Use STL containers, especially vector.

No user code should ever use "delete"; it should only appear in the
implementation of a container or smart pointer.

-- 
Ross Smith ...................... Pharos Systems, Auckland, New Zealand

"C++ is to programming as sex is to reproduction. Better ways might
technically exist but they're not nearly as much fun." - Nikolai Irgens
 

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/