Is delete *p an alternative to delete [] p?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
}
15
The following code is from the Microsoft Documentation
int (**p) () = new (int (*[7]) ());
delete *p;
I think that delete p should be used here instead.
Is delete *p the same as delete p?
c++ arrays
edited Apr 4 at 20:10
Guillaume Racicot
16.4k53872
asked Apr 4 at 20:09
xiaokaoyxiaokaoy
7372719
add a comment |
15
The following code is from the Microsoft Documentation
int (**p) () = new (int (*[7]) ());
delete *p;
I think that delete p should be used here instead.
Is delete *p the same as delete p?
c++ arrays
edited Apr 4 at 20:10
Guillaume Racicot
16.4k53872
asked Apr 4 at 20:09
xiaokaoyxiaokaoy
7372719
5
delete *pdiffers fromdelete p.
– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
You're right. They're not the same.
– Cruz Jean
Apr 4 at 20:10
1
typedefwould make thing clearer.
– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
Anywayp[0]is not initialized. They have typo.
– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:14
deletewhat wasnewed anddeletewhat wasnewed. Though in modern code you should avoid most uses ofnew, it's no longer the preferred way of dynamically creating objects. Seestd::make_uniqueandstd::make_sharedinstead or use a standard container.
– François Andrieux
Apr 4 at 20:29
add a comment |
15
15
15
1
The following code is from the Microsoft Documentation
int (**p) () = new (int (*[7]) ());
delete *p;
I think that delete p should be used here instead.
Is delete *p the same as delete p?
c++ arrays
edited Apr 4 at 20:10
Guillaume Racicot
16.4k53872
asked Apr 4 at 20:09
xiaokaoyxiaokaoy
7372719
The following code is from the Microsoft Documentation
int (**p) () = new (int (*[7]) ());
delete *p;
I think that delete p should be used here instead.
Is delete *p the same as delete p?
c++ arrays
c++ arrays
edited Apr 4 at 20:10
Guillaume Racicot
16.4k53872
asked Apr 4 at 20:09
xiaokaoyxiaokaoy
7372719
edited Apr 4 at 20:10
Guillaume Racicot
16.4k53872
asked Apr 4 at 20:09
xiaokaoyxiaokaoy
7372719
edited Apr 4 at 20:10
Guillaume Racicot
16.4k53872
edited Apr 4 at 20:10
Guillaume Racicot
16.4k53872
edited Apr 4 at 20:10
Guillaume Racicot
16.4k53872
16.4k53872
asked Apr 4 at 20:09
xiaokaoyxiaokaoy
7372719
asked Apr 4 at 20:09
xiaokaoyxiaokaoy
7372719
asked Apr 4 at 20:09
xiaokaoyxiaokaoy
7372719
7372719
5
delete *pdiffers fromdelete p.
– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
You're right. They're not the same.
– Cruz Jean
Apr 4 at 20:10
1
typedefwould make thing clearer.
– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
Anywayp[0]is not initialized. They have typo.
– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:14
deletewhat wasnewed anddeletewhat wasnewed. Though in modern code you should avoid most uses ofnew, it's no longer the preferred way of dynamically creating objects. Seestd::make_uniqueandstd::make_sharedinstead or use a standard container.
– François Andrieux
Apr 4 at 20:29
add a comment |
5
delete *pdiffers fromdelete p.
– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
You're right. They're not the same.
– Cruz Jean
Apr 4 at 20:10
1
typedefwould make thing clearer.
– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
Anywayp[0]is not initialized. They have typo.
– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:14
deletewhat wasnewed anddeletewhat wasnewed. Though in modern code you should avoid most uses ofnew, it's no longer the preferred way of dynamically creating objects. Seestd::make_uniqueandstd::make_sharedinstead or use a standard container.
– François Andrieux
Apr 4 at 20:29
5
5
delete *p differs from delete p.– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
delete *p differs from delete p.– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
You're right. They're not the same.
– Cruz Jean
Apr 4 at 20:10
You're right. They're not the same.
– Cruz Jean
Apr 4 at 20:10
1
1
typedef would make thing clearer.– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
typedef would make thing clearer.– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
Anyway
p[0] is not initialized. They have typo.– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:14
Anyway
p[0] is not initialized. They have typo.– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:14
delete what was newed and delete what was newed. Though in modern code you should avoid most uses of new, it's no longer the preferred way of dynamically creating objects. See std::make_unique and std::make_shared instead or use a standard container.– François Andrieux
Apr 4 at 20:29
delete what was newed and delete what was newed. Though in modern code you should avoid most uses of new, it's no longer the preferred way of dynamically creating objects. See std::make_unique and std::make_shared instead or use a standard container.– François Andrieux
Apr 4 at 20:29
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
16
That code is invalid C++, because only pointers-to-objects can be deleted. *p has type int (*)(), which is a function pointer, not a pointer to an object.
Even MSVC itself does not compile it, even in permissive mode:
error C2541: 'delete': cannot delete objects that are not pointers
They should have used delete instead.
answered Apr 4 at 20:17
AcornAcorn
6,40111441
In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?
– Ayxan
Apr 4 at 20:34
@Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:45
@Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:52
1
Even though this is specific to MSVC, g++ gives the following similar error when trying to compile:error: cannot delete expression of type 'int (*)()'.. seems odd that MS would have missed something that simple in their docs :/
– txtechhelp
Apr 4 at 22:04
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55524140%2fis-delete-p-an-alternative-to-delete-p%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
16
That code is invalid C++, because only pointers-to-objects can be deleted. *p has type int (*)(), which is a function pointer, not a pointer to an object.
Even MSVC itself does not compile it, even in permissive mode:
error C2541: 'delete': cannot delete objects that are not pointers
They should have used delete instead.
answered Apr 4 at 20:17
AcornAcorn
6,40111441
In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?
– Ayxan
Apr 4 at 20:34
@Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:45
@Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:52
1
Even though this is specific to MSVC, g++ gives the following similar error when trying to compile:error: cannot delete expression of type 'int (*)()'.. seems odd that MS would have missed something that simple in their docs :/
– txtechhelp
Apr 4 at 22:04
add a comment |
16
That code is invalid C++, because only pointers-to-objects can be deleted. *p has type int (*)(), which is a function pointer, not a pointer to an object.
Even MSVC itself does not compile it, even in permissive mode:
error C2541: 'delete': cannot delete objects that are not pointers
They should have used delete instead.
answered Apr 4 at 20:17
AcornAcorn
6,40111441
In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?
– Ayxan
Apr 4 at 20:34
@Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:45
@Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:52
1
Even though this is specific to MSVC, g++ gives the following similar error when trying to compile:error: cannot delete expression of type 'int (*)()'.. seems odd that MS would have missed something that simple in their docs :/
– txtechhelp
Apr 4 at 22:04
add a comment |
16
16
16
That code is invalid C++, because only pointers-to-objects can be deleted. *p has type int (*)(), which is a function pointer, not a pointer to an object.
Even MSVC itself does not compile it, even in permissive mode:
error C2541: 'delete': cannot delete objects that are not pointers
They should have used delete instead.
answered Apr 4 at 20:17
AcornAcorn
6,40111441
That code is invalid C++, because only pointers-to-objects can be deleted. *p has type int (*)(), which is a function pointer, not a pointer to an object.
Even MSVC itself does not compile it, even in permissive mode:
error C2541: 'delete': cannot delete objects that are not pointers
They should have used delete instead.
answered Apr 4 at 20:17
AcornAcorn
6,40111441
edited Apr 4 at 20:22
answered Apr 4 at 20:17
AcornAcorn
6,40111441
answered Apr 4 at 20:17
AcornAcorn
6,40111441
answered Apr 4 at 20:17
AcornAcorn
6,40111441
6,40111441
In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?
– Ayxan
Apr 4 at 20:34
@Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:45
@Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:52
1
Even though this is specific to MSVC, g++ gives the following similar error when trying to compile:error: cannot delete expression of type 'int (*)()'.. seems odd that MS would have missed something that simple in their docs :/
– txtechhelp
Apr 4 at 22:04
add a comment |
In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?
– Ayxan
Apr 4 at 20:34
@Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:45
@Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:52
1
Even though this is specific to MSVC, g++ gives the following similar error when trying to compile:error: cannot delete expression of type 'int (*)()'.. seems odd that MS would have missed something that simple in their docs :/
– txtechhelp
Apr 4 at 22:04
In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?
– Ayxan
Apr 4 at 20:34
In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?
– Ayxan
Apr 4 at 20:34
@Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:45
@Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:45
@Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:52
@Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398
– Acorn
Apr 4 at 20:52
1
1
Even though this is specific to MSVC, g++ gives the following similar error when trying to compile:
error: cannot delete expression of type 'int (*)()' .. seems odd that MS would have missed something that simple in their docs :/– txtechhelp
Apr 4 at 22:04
Even though this is specific to MSVC, g++ gives the following similar error when trying to compile:
error: cannot delete expression of type 'int (*)()' .. seems odd that MS would have missed something that simple in their docs :/– txtechhelp
Apr 4 at 22:04
add a comment |
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55524140%2fis-delete-p-an-alternative-to-delete-p%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
5
delete *pdiffers fromdelete p.– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
You're right. They're not the same.
– Cruz Jean
Apr 4 at 20:10
1
typedefwould make thing clearer.– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:10
Anyway
p[0]is not initialized. They have typo.– Jarod42
Apr 4 at 20:14
deletewhat wasnewed anddeletewhat wasnewed. Though in modern code you should avoid most uses ofnew, it's no longer the preferred way of dynamically creating objects. Seestd::make_uniqueandstd::make_sharedinstead or use a standard container.– François Andrieux
Apr 4 at 20:29