Dynamic memory confusion

**ripper079** · 11-04-2002

I was "playing around" with pointers on the heap when a suddenly got an idea (probably a stupid one). Is it possible to allocate more dynamic memory on an already dynamic allocated memory? I will explain it with an example so you hopefully understand what I mean. For instanse if I use a (predefind or user-defined) string class through a pointer like this

Code:

string *pname = new string;

This means that somewhere on the heap a string-object has been created (or allocated). Doesn´t this mean that all data-members are on the heap or free store??? Usually is a string class rather dynamic which means that it has some kind of pointer. That pointer allocates new dynamic memory on another place on the heap. Is it possible to to call new on a object thats on the heap as many times you wish???

Code:

//Pointer to a string, works good, string handles everthing "internally"
string *pek = new string;

//Pointer to a pointer-string, why doesn´t this work???
//*string *ppek = new *string;

I just need some clarification.

I hope you understand what I mean.

**JoeSixpack** · 11-04-2002

> Doesn´t this mean that all data-members are on the heap or free store???<

Yes.

>Is it possible to to call new on a object thats on the heap as many times you wish??? <

If by this you mean that your object is allocated using heap memory and it contains pointers that point to memory also allocated on the heap then yes. In this sense it doesn't matter where something is allocated, it's just an address in memory.

>//Pointer to a pointer-string, why doesn´t this work???
//*string *ppek = new *string;
<

It doesn't work because it's not valid C++. I'm not sure what you're trying to do. Something like -

string** ppek = new string*;
*ppek = new string;
?

**ripper079** · 11-04-2002

Perfect clear now!

Thx

**Hunter2** · 11-04-2002

Hey, would there be a difference in how fast these would crash a computer?

Code:

//Case 1:
while(true)
     double** pp = new double*;

//Case 2:
while(true)
     double* p = new double;

**JoeSixpack** · 11-04-2002

It would depend of the sizeof each one.

**Hunter2** · 11-04-2002

hmm... somehow, I had the impression that pointers took less memory than doubles though... maybe 2 bytes? 4 bytes? But a double takes 8 bytes, doesn't it? Oh well, I guess I'll just have to create a test proggie

Thread: Dynamic memory confusion

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Dynamic memory confusion

Similar Threads

Dynamic Linking & Memory usage

Dynamic memory allocation...

Is it necessary to write a specific memory manager ?

dynamic memory + linked lists

Dynamic Memory Allocation for fstream (binary)