Skip to main content

Use delete on pointer members in destructors.

Item 6: Use delete on pointer members in destructors.
Most of the time, classes performing dynamic memory allocation will use new in the constructor(s) to allocate
the memory and will later use delete in the destructor to free up the memory. This isn't too difficult to get right
when you first write the class, provided, of course, that you remember to employ delete on all the members that
could have been assigned memory in any constructor.
However, the situation becomes more difficult as classes are maintained and enhanced, because the
programmers making the modifications to the class may not be the ones who wrote the class in the first place.
Under those conditions, it's easy to forget that adding a pointer member almost always requires each of the
following:
 Initialization of the pointer in each of the constructors. If no memory is to be allocated to the pointer in a
particular constructor, the pointer should be initialized to 0 (i.e., the null pointer).
 Deletion of the existing memory and assignment of new memory in the assignment operator. (See also Item
17.)
 Deletion of the pointer in the destructor.
If you forget to initialize a pointer in a constructor, or if you forget to handle it inside the assignment operator,
the problem usually becomes apparent fairly quickly, so in practice those issues don't tend to plague you. Failing
to delete the pointer in the destructor, however, often exhibits no obvious external symptoms. Instead, it
manifests itself as a subtle memory leak, a slowly growing cancer that will eventually devour your address
space and drive your program to an early demise. Because this particular problem doesn't usually call attention
to itself, it's important that you keep it in mind whenever you add a pointer member to a class.
Note, by the way, that deleting a null pointer is always safe (it does nothing). Thus, if you write your
constructors, your assignment operators, and your other member functions such that each pointer member of the
class is always either pointing to valid memory or is null, you can merrily delete away in the destructor without
regard for whether you ever used new for the pointer in question.
There's no reason to get fascist about this Item. For example, you certainly don't want to use delete on a pointer
that wasn't initialized via new, and, except in the case of smart pointer objects (see Item M28), you almost never
want to delete a pointer that was passed to you in the first place. In other words, your class destructor usually
shouldn't be using delete unless your class members were the ones who used new in the first place.
Speaking of smart pointers, one way to avoid the need to delete pointer members is to replace those members
with smart pointer objects like the standard C++ Library's auto_ptr.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigations Exam - Single Select

Last updated 4 Aug 11 Course Title: OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigation Exam Questions - Single Select 1) Which of the following consequences is most likely to occur due to an injection attack? Spoofing Cross-site request forgery Denial of service   Correct Insecure direct object references 2) Your application is created using a language that does not support a clear distinction between code and data. Which vulnerability is most likely to occur in your application? Injection   Correct Insecure direct object references Failure to restrict URL access Insufficient transport layer protection 3) Which of the following scenarios is most likely to cause an injection attack? Unvalidated input is embedded in an instruction stream.   Correct Unvalidated input can be distinguished from valid instructions. A Web application does not validate a client’s access to a resource. A Web action performs an operation on behalf of the user without checking a shared sec

CKA Simulator Kubernetes 1.22

  https://killer.sh Pre Setup Once you've gained access to your terminal it might be wise to spend ~1 minute to setup your environment. You could set these: alias k = kubectl                         # will already be pre-configured export do = "--dry-run=client -o yaml"     # k get pod x $do export now = "--force --grace-period 0"   # k delete pod x $now Vim To make vim use 2 spaces for a tab edit ~/.vimrc to contain: set tabstop=2 set expandtab set shiftwidth=2 More setup suggestions are in the tips section .     Question 1 | Contexts Task weight: 1%   You have access to multiple clusters from your main terminal through kubectl contexts. Write all those context names into /opt/course/1/contexts . Next write a command to display the current context into /opt/course/1/context_default_kubectl.sh , the command should use kubectl . Finally write a second command doing the same thing into /opt/course/1/context_default_no_kubectl.sh , but without the use of k

标 题: 关于Daniel Guo 律师

发信人: q123452017 (水天一色), 信区: I140 标  题: 关于Daniel Guo 律师 关键字: Daniel Guo 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Apr 26 02:11:35 2018, 美东) 这些是lz根据亲身经历在 Immigration版上发的帖以及一些关于Daniel Guo 律师的回 帖,希望大家不要被一些马甲帖广告帖所骗,慎重考虑选择律师。 WG 和Guo两家律师对比 1. fully refund的合约上的区别 wegreened家是case不过只要第二次没有file就可以fully refund。郭家是要两次case 没过才给refund,而且只要第二次pl draft好律师就可以不退任何律师费。 2. 回信速度 wegreened家一般24小时内回信。郭律师是在可以快速回复的时候才回复很快,对于需 要时间回复或者是不愿意给出确切答复的时候就回复的比较慢。 比如:lz问过郭律师他们律所在nsc区域最近eb1a的通过率,大家也知道nsc现在杀手如 云,但是郭律师过了两天只回复说让秘书update最近的case然后去网页上查,但是上面 并没有写明tsc还是nsc。 lz还问过郭律师关于准备ps (他要求的文件)的一些问题,模版上有的东西不是很清 楚,但是他一般就是把模版上的东西再copy一遍发过来。 3. 材料区别 (推荐信) 因为我只收到郭律师写的推荐信,所以可以比下两家推荐信 wegreened家推荐信写的比较长,而且每封推荐信会用不同的语气和风格,会包含lz写 的research summary里面的某个方面 郭家四封推荐信都是一个格式,一种语气,连地址,信的称呼都是一样的,怎么看四封 推荐信都是同一个人写出来的。套路基本都是第一段目的,第二段介绍推荐人,第三段 某篇或几篇文章的abstract,最后结论 4. 前期材料准备 wegreened家要按照他们的模版准备一个十几页的research summary。 郭律师在签约之前说的是只需要准备五页左右的summary,但是在lz签完约收到推荐信 ,郭律师又发来一个很长的ps要lz自己填,而且和pl的格式基本差不多。 总结下来,申请自己上心最重要。但是如果选律师,lz更倾向于wegreened,