NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20/NN_1992_20.iso/spool/comp/lang/cplus/13433

Internet Message Format | 1992-09-09 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!lhdsy1!kato.lahabra.chevron.com!hwrvo
From: [e-mail] (W.R. Volz)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: malloc or new in c++
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 9 Sep 92 16:45:26 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Chevron Oil Field Research Company
Lines: 31

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Cyberman) writes:
|>
|>      -=> Chuang He spoke of "malloc or new in c++" <=-
|>     To All at 08-31-92  19:44
|>  The FAQ states NOT to use malloc in C++ programs it's thier only
|>  for backwards compatibility [ie compile older files on a C++
|>  compilor].
|>
|> Yes use ALL new and delete statements and eliminate all malloc
|> and free function calls!  This will more than likely solve at
|> least 1 potential problem.
|>

Let me get this straight: Are you saying that there is a problem of using
malloc in a c++ program? I realize that if I malloc some memory, then
I need to free it with free(). And if a create a new object with new, then I
delete with delete. I wouldn't 'free' an object allocated with 'new' and
'delete' an object allocated with 'malloc'. But if there is an incompatibility
in c++ between (malloc,free) and (new,delete), I don't know how one can mix
any program that uses both allocatation schemes. This would seem to indicate
that all existing code would have to be rewritten. It this true. If so, it
could just spell the death of c++. The c code base is just too large.

--

======================
Bill Volz
Chevron Oil Field Research Co.
Exploration Research/Geophysics Division.
P.O. Box 446, La Habra, CA 90633-0446
Phone: [phone]