you know how the C++ fanboys are

No

you got two groups of people , people that C guys and C++ guys that hate on C and say that C style of coding is not good . OOP lovers , and there are some who are not so bias

#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> /* required for the malloc and free functions */ int main() { int number; int *ptr; int i; printf("How many ints would you like store? "); scanf("%d", &number); ptr =malloc(number*sizeof(int)); /* allocate memory */ if(ptr!=NULL) { for(i=0 ; i<number ; i++) { *(ptr+i) = i; } for(i=number ; i>0 ; i--) { printf("%d\n", *(ptr+(i-1))); /* print out in reverse order */ } free(ptr); /* free allocated memory */ return 0; } else { printf("\nMemory allocation failed - not enough memory.\n"); return 1; } }

Becouse vs is garbage. It's very hard, so u spend a lot of time just for waiting. It has bad compiler: the latest version of compiler(should include c++17 and already completed c++20 features) does not compile c++17 code(even if it is not major changes). Vs can refuse to open the file, just becouse the file is open(even if it is closed)

Becouse vs is garbage. It's very hard, so u spend a lot of time just for waiting. It has bad compiler: the latest version of compiler(should include c++17 and already completed c++20 features) does not compile c++17 code(even if it is not major changes). Vs can refuse to open the file, just becouse the file is open(even if it is closed)

MVC++ is the first compiler that supports C++17 fully

MVC++ is the first compiler that supports C++17 fully

What about g++?

It's gud

I thought clang has c++17 support too

That's the one I use

Hm

It supports full C++17

Well, clang is a really good compiler after all

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support

That's the one I use

int* ptr = new int(5); memory leak delete ptr # fix memory leak if we dont add ptr = NULL we got information leak right? # info leak fix return ptr

int *ptr = new int[5]; //Do stuff ptr = nullptr; //We lose the originally allocated 5 ints, and there's no way to delete them; We 'leak' memory

in a few words after delete , free becomes a dang pointer and a new vuln information leak , and we need to point to null to fix right ?

If i do this then it will keep the info leak bug

I will check and smart pointers too

int* ptr = new int(5); memory leak delete ptr # fix memory leak if we dont add ptr = NULL we got information leak right? # info leak fix return ptr

So this isn't the right way to delete a pointer?

So this isn't the right way to delete a pointer?

Nope those contains vulnerabilities

So this isn't the right way to delete a pointer?

What is the right way?

You don't delete memory leaks, since a memory leak is when you have memory to which you have no pointer anymore; You 'delete' allocated (with new) memory.

You don't delete memory leaks, since a memory leak is when you have memory to which you have no pointer anymore; You 'delete' allocated (with new) memory.

Some mate says smart pointers and other thing

If you want to protect against info leaks Just assign your raw pointer to nullptr/NULL after deleting it. Also, assign your new allocated memory, if it has not been assigned yet.

Who here has experience with WinAPI?

😏 no notes on digraph and trigraph sequences - https://www.google.com/amp/s/developerinsider.co/what-is-digraphs-trigraphs-and-tokens-c-cpp-programming-language/amp/

Hi, which course you recommend on "coursera" to learn c++?