How could pairing new[] with delete possibly lead to memory leak only?

by

Suppose I’m a C++ compiler, and I implement my memory management like this: I prepend every block of reserved memory with the size of the memory, in bytes. Something like this;

| size | data ... |
         ^
         pointer returned by new and new[]

Note that, in terms of memory allocation, there is no difference between new and new[]: both just allocate a block of memory of a certain size.

Now how will delete[] know the size of the array, in order to call the right number of destructors? Simply divide the size of the memory block by sizeof(T), where T is the type of elements of the array.

Now suppose I implement delete as simply one call to the destructor, followed by the freeing of the size bytes, then the destructors of the subsequent elements will never be called. This results in leaking resources allocated by the subsequent elements. Yet, because I do free size bytes (not sizeof(T) bytes), no heap corruption occurs.

More Related Contents:

  1. Are memory leaks “undefined behavior” class problem in C++?
  2. Implementing a std::vector like container without undefined behavior
  3. Avoid memory leaks in C++ Pointers [closed]
  4. C++ – destructors [closed]
  5. Is uninitialized local variable the fastest random number generator?
  6. delete vs delete[] [duplicate]
  7. Global memory management in C++ in stack or heap?
  8. Why dereferencing a null pointer is undefined behaviour?
  9. Why doesn’t delete set the pointer to NULL?
  10. Smart pointers: who owns the object? [closed]
  11. Why is out-of-bounds pointer arithmetic undefined behaviour?
  12. Is there a reason to call delete in C++ when a program is exiting anyway?
  13. Why is stack memory size so limited?
  14. Allocating more memory than there exists using malloc
  15. How do you determine the size of an object in C++?
  16. Initial capacity of vector in C++
  17. Why is there no reallocation functionality in C++ allocators?
  18. Is it safe to realloc memory allocated with new?
  19. What do I need to do before deleting elements in a vector of pointers to dynamically allocated objects?
  20. new() without delete() is Undefined Behavior or merely Memory Leak? [duplicate]
  21. Why does printf(“%f”,0); give undefined behavior?
  22. Call destructor and then constructor (resetting an object)
  23. Memory allocation and deallocation across dll boundaries
  24. How to track memory allocations in C++ (especially new/delete)
  25. When a float variable goes out of the float limits, what happens?
  26. Dangling references and undefined behavior
  27. How to check memory allocation failures with new operator?
  28. new, delete ,malloc & free
  29. C++ is it necessary to delete dynamically allocated objects at the end of the main scope?
  30. Should objects delete themselves in C++?

Leave a Comment