we knows that we can use free() for Malloc and delete() for new.
can we use delete for new and free for malloc?

thankx in advance.

hi meendar,
have a look at this. your question is better answered here

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit....html#faq-16.3

Suriya

On 25 Dec 2005 22:19:09 -0800 in comp.lang.c++, "meendar"
<askjavaprogrammers@gmail.com> wrote,[color=blue]
>we knows that we can use free() for Malloc and delete() for new.
>can we use delete for new and free for malloc?[/color]

No.

(However, there is no requirement that the implementation trap the
mismatch, so you may appear to get away with it for a while. Be
advised that it is only waiting for the most embarrassing moment to
bite you.)

sorry the question is.



we knows that we can use free() for Malloc and delete() for new.
can we use free() for new and delete() for malloc?

meendar wrote:[color=blue]
> sorry the question is.
>
>
>
> we knows that we can use free() for Malloc and delete() for new.
> can we use free() for new and delete() for malloc?[/color]

Hi Meendar

Did you make an effort to go through the link that was given by Suriya
? That answers your question. Please go through that link.

Thanks!! and have a nice day!!
Jaspreet

"suriya" <aktersuriya@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1135578339.232497.316870@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...[color=blue]
> hi meendar,
> have a look at this. your question is better answered here
>
> http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit....html#faq-16.3
>
> Suriya
>[/color]

That link does not state the reason you should not use free for new.

new'ed memory may be allocated in some method other than malloc by the
compiler. Also, new could be overridden (?) to gain memory in some other
method also.

Jim Langston wrote:[color=blue]
> "suriya" <aktersuriya@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1135578339.232497.316870@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...[color=green]
>> hi meendar,
>> have a look at this. your question is better answered here
>>
>> http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit....html#faq-16.3
>>
>> Suriya
>>[/color]
>
> That link does not state the reason you should not use free for new.
>
> new'ed memory may be allocated in some method other than malloc by the
> compiler. Also, new could be overridden (?) to gain memory in some other
> method also.
>
>[/color]
There is nothing that says new'd memory even without the override is
allocated in the same way as malloc.

"Ron Natalie" <ron@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:43b020eb$0$11599$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.co m...[color=blue]
> Jim Langston wrote:[color=green]
>> "suriya" <aktersuriya@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1135578339.232497.316870@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...[color=darkred]
>>> hi meendar,
>>> have a look at this. your question is better answered here
>>>
>>> http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit....html#faq-16.3
>>>
>>> Suriya
>>>[/color]
>>
>> That link does not state the reason you should not use free for new.
>>
>> new'ed memory may be allocated in some method other than malloc by the
>> compiler. Also, new could be overridden (?) to gain memory in some other
>> method also.[/color]
> There is nothing that says new'd memory even without the override is
> allocated in the same way as malloc.[/color]

Well, yeah, that's what I said.

Hi meendar,
We can use fee for malloc, and delete for new. because at the time of
using new operator its can be done 2 steps. allocation of memory(like
malloc) and it calls constructor.If by using free function ,it doesn't
calls destructor.So we didn't use free function for new operator.