A smart pointer hacked with a deleter doesn't solve the problem either though -- you need to use new[] as well. Custom allocator maybe? I don't even know if they work like that to be honest. But you are fighting me more about this than you should be.Point is, the OP is doing just that, and hence, a smart pointer should relieve some of that burden.
Err... that generally is less of a problem than not using a deleter to invoke delete[].Originally Posted by whiteflags
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
I never took the time to care about such a minute detail.
new[] pairs with delete[]
new pairs with delete
And I don't change that just because I'm using template magic and RAII.
You shouldn't change that, which is precisely why if you do choose to use new[] with unique_ptr or shared_ptr, then you should provide a deleter to invoke delete[].
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Since whiteflags still does not accept private messages, and since this might be of use to other people who wants to use custom deleters, here is an example on how to do it:
Yep. That's it. That's all you need.Code:std::shared_ptr<int> test(new int[5], [](int* p) { delete [] p; });
If you really need unqiue_ptr, then this should do the trick:
Code:auto deleter = [](int* p) { delete [] p; }; std::unique_ptr<int, decltype(deleter)> test2(new int[5], deleter);
I believe that you only need to write:
Code:std::unique_ptr<int, std::default_delete<int[5]>> test2(new int[5]);
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Actually from these 2 souces:
std::default_delete - Cppreference
std::unique_ptr - Cppreference
It should be enough to just write
Code:std::unique_ptr<int[]> uptr(new int[10]);
