From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Subject: Unchecked_Deallocation vs. delete
Date: 9 May 2007 09:27:25 -0700
Date: 2007-05-09T09:27:25-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1178728045.890171.6110@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> (raw)
What's the benefit of Unchecked_Deallocation as a generic library
procedure vs. built-in deallocation operator like delete in C++?
The disadvantage, as far as I perceive it, is that it breaks the
symmetry that should be expected with regard to the allocation
operation. If "new" is built-in, then the deallocation should be built-
in as well. Making it a generic library procedure just makes more work
for the programmers for no clear reason.
What clear reason am I missing?
--
Maciej Sobczak
http://www.msobczak.com/
next reply other threads:[~2007-05-09 16:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-09 16:27 Maciej Sobczak [this message]
2007-05-09 17:02 ` Unchecked_Deallocation vs. delete Dmitry A. Kazakov
2007-05-09 20:56 ` Robert A Duff
2007-05-09 20:59 ` Keith Thompson
2007-05-10 20:09 ` Maciej Sobczak
2007-05-11 7:35 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2007-05-11 8:15 ` Maciej Sobczak
2007-05-11 16:39 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2007-05-16 19:25 ` Randy Brukardt
2007-05-10 21:10 ` Markus E Leypold
2007-05-09 17:51 ` Martin Krischik
2007-05-09 20:54 ` Robert A Duff
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox