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;
}







11















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







share|improve this question




















  • 4





    delete *p differs from delete p.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago











  • You're right. They're not the same.

    – Cruz Jean
    9 hours ago






  • 1





    typedef would make thing clearer.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago













  • Anyway p[0] is not initialized. They have typo.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago











  • 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
    9 hours ago




















11















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







share|improve this question




















  • 4





    delete *p differs from delete p.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago











  • You're right. They're not the same.

    – Cruz Jean
    9 hours ago






  • 1





    typedef would make thing clearer.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago













  • Anyway p[0] is not initialized. They have typo.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago











  • 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
    9 hours ago
















11












11








11








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







share|improve this question
















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






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 9 hours ago









Guillaume Racicot

16.1k53871




16.1k53871










asked 9 hours ago









xiaokaoyxiaokaoy

7152719




7152719








  • 4





    delete *p differs from delete p.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago











  • You're right. They're not the same.

    – Cruz Jean
    9 hours ago






  • 1





    typedef would make thing clearer.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago













  • Anyway p[0] is not initialized. They have typo.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago











  • 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
    9 hours ago
















  • 4





    delete *p differs from delete p.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago











  • You're right. They're not the same.

    – Cruz Jean
    9 hours ago






  • 1





    typedef would make thing clearer.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago













  • Anyway p[0] is not initialized. They have typo.

    – Jarod42
    9 hours ago











  • 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
    9 hours ago










4




4





delete *p differs from delete p.

– Jarod42
9 hours ago





delete *p differs from delete p.

– Jarod42
9 hours ago













You're right. They're not the same.

– Cruz Jean
9 hours ago





You're right. They're not the same.

– Cruz Jean
9 hours ago




1




1





typedef would make thing clearer.

– Jarod42
9 hours ago







typedef would make thing clearer.

– Jarod42
9 hours ago















Anyway p[0] is not initialized. They have typo.

– Jarod42
9 hours ago





Anyway p[0] is not initialized. They have typo.

– Jarod42
9 hours ago













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
9 hours ago







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
9 hours ago














2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















12














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.






share|improve this answer


























  • In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?

    – Ayxan
    9 hours ago











  • @Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • @Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • 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
    7 hours ago





















-4















  1. This code specifically has a different issue as it tries to delete an inner element of an array so it will not compile. It would compile if you wrote delete p and not delete *p.

  2. You can use simple delete on an object allocated by new if It is an array of primitive types. Bad practice, ugly, yes. But not a mistake.

  3. The difference between delete and delete is that the former also calls destructors. For primitive types, however, it will call simple delete to free the memory internally anyway.

  4. Again, even if it works, you should avoid mixing operator types.






share|improve this answer
























  • delete calls destructors...

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • Mixing operators is undefined behavior.

    – Ayxan
    8 hours ago












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


















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

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









12














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.






share|improve this answer


























  • In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?

    – Ayxan
    9 hours ago











  • @Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • @Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • 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
    7 hours ago


















12














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.






share|improve this answer


























  • In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?

    – Ayxan
    9 hours ago











  • @Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • @Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • 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
    7 hours ago
















12












12








12







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.






share|improve this answer















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.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 9 hours ago

























answered 9 hours ago









AcornAcorn

6,20111341




6,20111341













  • In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?

    – Ayxan
    9 hours ago











  • @Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • @Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • 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
    7 hours ago





















  • In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?

    – Ayxan
    9 hours ago











  • @Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • @Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • 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
    7 hours ago



















In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?

– Ayxan
9 hours ago





In what context one may need to dynamically allocate pointers to functions?

– Ayxan
9 hours ago













@Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.

– Acorn
8 hours ago





@Ayxan That would be another question, but for instance you may want to have a list of arbitrary operations to execute.

– Acorn
8 hours ago













@Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398

– Acorn
8 hours ago





@Ayxan I have quickly posted it here: stackoverflow.com/q/55524710/9305398

– Acorn
8 hours ago













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
7 hours ago







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
7 hours ago















-4















  1. This code specifically has a different issue as it tries to delete an inner element of an array so it will not compile. It would compile if you wrote delete p and not delete *p.

  2. You can use simple delete on an object allocated by new if It is an array of primitive types. Bad practice, ugly, yes. But not a mistake.

  3. The difference between delete and delete is that the former also calls destructors. For primitive types, however, it will call simple delete to free the memory internally anyway.

  4. Again, even if it works, you should avoid mixing operator types.






share|improve this answer
























  • delete calls destructors...

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • Mixing operators is undefined behavior.

    – Ayxan
    8 hours ago
















-4















  1. This code specifically has a different issue as it tries to delete an inner element of an array so it will not compile. It would compile if you wrote delete p and not delete *p.

  2. You can use simple delete on an object allocated by new if It is an array of primitive types. Bad practice, ugly, yes. But not a mistake.

  3. The difference between delete and delete is that the former also calls destructors. For primitive types, however, it will call simple delete to free the memory internally anyway.

  4. Again, even if it works, you should avoid mixing operator types.






share|improve this answer
























  • delete calls destructors...

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • Mixing operators is undefined behavior.

    – Ayxan
    8 hours ago














-4












-4








-4








  1. This code specifically has a different issue as it tries to delete an inner element of an array so it will not compile. It would compile if you wrote delete p and not delete *p.

  2. You can use simple delete on an object allocated by new if It is an array of primitive types. Bad practice, ugly, yes. But not a mistake.

  3. The difference between delete and delete is that the former also calls destructors. For primitive types, however, it will call simple delete to free the memory internally anyway.

  4. Again, even if it works, you should avoid mixing operator types.






share|improve this answer














  1. This code specifically has a different issue as it tries to delete an inner element of an array so it will not compile. It would compile if you wrote delete p and not delete *p.

  2. You can use simple delete on an object allocated by new if It is an array of primitive types. Bad practice, ugly, yes. But not a mistake.

  3. The difference between delete and delete is that the former also calls destructors. For primitive types, however, it will call simple delete to free the memory internally anyway.

  4. Again, even if it works, you should avoid mixing operator types.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 8 hours ago









Yuri NudelmanYuri Nudelman

1,4061614




1,4061614













  • delete calls destructors...

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • Mixing operators is undefined behavior.

    – Ayxan
    8 hours ago



















  • delete calls destructors...

    – Acorn
    8 hours ago











  • Mixing operators is undefined behavior.

    – Ayxan
    8 hours ago

















delete calls destructors...

– Acorn
8 hours ago





delete calls destructors...

– Acorn
8 hours ago













Mixing operators is undefined behavior.

– Ayxan
8 hours ago





Mixing operators is undefined behavior.

– Ayxan
8 hours ago


















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














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





















































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







-

Popular posts from this blog

How to label and detect the document text images

Image
1 $begingroup$ This is what I mean as document text image: I want to label the texts in image as separate blocks and my model should detect these labels as classes. NOTE: This is how the end result should be like: The labels like Block 1, Block 2, Block 3,.. should be Logo, Title, Date,.. Others, etc. Work done: First approach : I tried to implement this method via Object Detection, it didn't work. It didn't even detect any text. Second approach : Then I tried it using PixelLink. As this model is build for scene text detection, it detected each and every text in the image. But this method can detect multiple lines of text if the threshold values are increased. But I have no idea how do I add labels to the text blocks. PIXEL_CLS_WEIGHT_all_ones = 'PIXEL_CLS_WEIGHT_all_ones' PIXEL_C...
Read more

Vallis Paradisi

Image
Coordinata: .mw-parser-output .geo-default,.mw-parser-output .geo-dms,.mw-parser-output .geo-dec{display:inline}.mw-parser-output .geo-nondefault,.mw-parser-output .geo-multi-punct{display:none}.mw-parser-output .longitude,.mw-parser-output .latitude{white-space:nowrap} 33°03′S 71°37′W  /  33.05°S 71.617°W  / -33.05; -71.617 Vallis Paradisi Res apud Vicidata repertae: Civitas : Chilia Numerus incolarum : 296 655 Zona horaria : UTC-4 Situs interretialis Nomen officiale : Valparaíso Gubernium Consilium : municipal council of Valparaíso Geographia Superficies : 401 600 000 Metrum quadratum Coniunctiones urbium Urbes gemellae : Ovetum , Badalona , Santa Fe , Ora longa , Sciamhaevum , Quantunia , Callao , Bat Yam , Melaka , Novorossiysk , Busan , Corduba , Odessa , Rosario , Malacca , Barcino , Soteropolis , Franciscopolis (California) , Guanajuato, Silao Tabula aut despectus Despectus in portum sinumque et urbem Vallis Paradisi Vallis Para...
Read more

Tabula Rosettana

Image
Tabula multilinguis Rosettana in Museo Britannico ostenditur. Tabula Rosettana, [1] etiam titulo OGIS 90 agnita, est stela decreto de rebus sacris in Aegypto anno 196 a.C.n. lato inscripta. Tabula iuxta Rosettam Aegypti, urbem in delta Nili et ad oram maris Mediterranei iacentem, anno 1799 a milite Francico reperta est. Inventio stelae, linguis duabus scripturisque tribus inscriptae, eruditis Instituti Aegypti statim nuntiata est; ibi enim iussu imperatoris Napoleonis eruditi omnium scientiarum (sub aegide Commissionis Scientiarum et Artium) properaverant cum expeditione Francica. Qua a Britannis mox debellata, tabula Rosettana Londinium missa hodie apud Museum Britannicum iacet. Textus Graecus cito lectus interpretationi textuum Aegyptiorum (in formis hieroglyphica et demotica expressorum) gradatim adiuvit. Denique textum plene interpretatus est Ioannes Franciscus Champollion. Ab opere eruditorum cumulativo coepit hodiernus scripturae hieroglyphicae linguaeque Aegyptiae a...
Read more