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

> 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/

- Raw text -