Behaviour of malloc with delete in C++

by

This is undefined behaviour, as there’s no way to reliably prove that memory behind the pointer was allocated correctly (i.e. by new for delete or new[] for delete[]). It’s your job to ensure things like that don’t happen. It’s simple when you use right tools, namely smart pointers. Whenever you say delete, you’re doing it wrong.

More Related Contents:

  1. convert static_castmalloc/free to new/delete
  2. C++ delete – It deletes my objects but I can still access the data?
  3. delete vs delete[] operators in C++
  4. Is “delete this” allowed in C++?
  5. Is it safe to delete a NULL pointer?
  6. Calling delete on variable allocated on the stack
  7. delete vs delete[] [duplicate]
  8. Why does C++ require a cast for malloc() but C doesn’t?
  9. How does delete[] know it’s an array?
  10. How do you ‘realloc’ in C++?
  11. Why doesn’t delete set the pointer to NULL?
  12. Deleting a pointer to const (T const*)
  13. C++ delete vector, objects, free memory
  14. Why would one replace default new and delete operators?
  15. overloading new/delete
  16. What is the difference between “new” and “malloc” and “calloc” in C++? [duplicate]
  17. Is it still safe to delete nullptr in c++0x?
  18. Is the pointer guaranteed to preserve its value after `delete` in C++?
  19. How can I get the size of a memory block allocated using malloc()? [duplicate]
  20. Deleting a pointer in C++
  21. Double free or corruption after queue::push
  22. delete[] an array of objects
  23. write and read string to binary file C++
  24. Multithreaded Memory Allocators for C/C++
  25. How does the custom deleter of std::unique_ptr work?
  26. Memory allocation and deallocation across dll boundaries
  27. malloc() vs. HeapAlloc()
  28. Segfaults in malloc() and malloc_consolidate()
  29. Why doesn’t delete destroy anything?
  30. Is the whole object freed with a non-virtual destructor and a Base class pointer?

Leave a Comment