allocation method

i saw a code example for dynamic memory c++ and have used the method in this function to allocate memory, is it an advisable way to do it? i never saw it eactly like this or maybe i have and forgotten.

Code:

---

void GetDrawNumbers(int tot_nums, int drawnums[])
{
   
    int allocsize = tot_nums;
    int* tempnums = new int[allocsize];

    //do stuff

    free(tempnums);


}

---

No. new[] must be matched with delete [].

Unless you have very specific reasons, you should be using a std::vector.

Free? not delete[]?

Quote:

---

Free? not delete[]?

---

haha, it is now delete, ay caramba, ta

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rogster001

haha, it is now delete, ay caramba, ta

---

It is now delete? You must have missed a point that anon made:

Code:

---

void GetDrawNumbers(int tot_nums, int drawnums[])
{
    std::vector<int> tempnums(tot_nums);

    //do stuff

    // look ma, no need to remember to free, delete or delete[]!
}

---

haha afraid i am a vector virgin lazy ole me... an it aint building for me like that maam, am looking up usage now,

EDIT >

this works, fine, am i doing anything wrong here? i am not handling the exception i know

Code:

---

void GetDrawNumbers(int tot_nums, int drawnums[])
{
    int check = 0;
    int num = 0;
    int count = 0;
    bool dupe = false;

    std::vector<int> tempnums(tot_nums, 0); //this initialises to 0?

    while(count < tot_nums)
    {
        num = rand() % MAXNUMS + 1;

        for(check = 0; check < tot_nums; check++)
        {
            if(tempnums.at(check) == num)
            dupe = true;
        }

        if(!dupe)
        {
            drawnums[count] = num;
            tempnums.at(count) = num;
            count++;
        }

        dupe = false;
    }
}

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rogster001

this works, fine, am i doing anything wrong here?

---

It looks okay, though it may be easier to write:

Code:

---

void GetDrawNumbers(int total_nums, int drawnums[])
{
    std::set<int> generated_nums;

    for (int i = 0; i < total_nums; ++i)
    {
        int num;
        do
        {
            num = rand() % MAXNUMS + 1;
        }
        while (!generated_nums.insert(num).second);

        drawnums[i] = num;
    }
}

---

Since you effectively want a set of generated numbers, you might as well use std::set. Then, you generate a pseudorandom number, and try and insert it into the set. If the insertion fails, you repeat the pseudorandom number generation and try again until insertion succeeds, in which case you fill in the next element of drawnums.

Just a comment about the algorithm: this is likely to work well when MAXNUMS is large. If MAXNUMS is sufficiently small, it would be more efficient to populate an array with the integers in the range [1, MAXNUMS], shuffle the array, then pick the first total_nums elements.

yes, point taken about the algorithm, that would be a much neater solution, i have written this sort of thing lots of times and that has never occured to me haha.

Just one thing here, you mention the use of std::set, it just strikes me that the more i learn about C++ the less there is to do,! i understand about not reinventing wheels but, it seems like such a high level language compared to C, and i know this has been argued umpteen times in these pages, but all this std stuff its like C++ is just an editor for pre built functional components that you just assemble as required, like lego, and whats wrong with that...i dont know if anything is wrong .but i am just saying...
and i suppose to commercial software writers this sort of thing is like a blessing, but then they have the benefit of knowing / understanding the way the function is working internally, beginners going straight into C++ can just use stuff blindly and never worry about what is going on, how it works, but then nobody worries about how their computer works in general, who cares which bit of electricity is at which junction at any one time, we just want to write documents etc

Programming generally is about getting a job done, not studying how things work under the hood (which, I'm sorry, you don't learn on your own by implementing naive algorithms with naive data structures either).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rogster001

beginners going straight into C++ can just use stuff blindly and never worry about what is going on, how it works, but then nobody worries about how their computer works in general, who cares which bit of electricity is at which junction at any one time, we just want to write documents etc

---

If beginners want to learn those, they should take the appropriate courses. Put it another way: would you require that everyone who wants to learn how to program first have a doctorate in particle physics? After all, people must learn about the building blocks of the universe in order to appreciate the building blocks of a computer, right?

EDIT:
But if you are trying to compare C and C++ in this department, both C and C++ are too high level. You should be complaining about how high level C is compared to assembly language, and then complain how mnemonics abstract what's really going on, compared to machine language.

Quote:

---

naive algorithms with naive data structures

---

naive maybe, but it "gets the job done"

May-be I was a bit harsh, but it is a possibility that the reinvented wheel turns out to be square (and if you never recognize it as such, you may not have learnt much).

However, if you are drawing non-repeating random numbers, then this is the problem. At some point you should have learnt how new[] is matched with delete[] and going on to use this doesn't teach you anything new. (Every C++ programmer should know that.)

And as laserlight says, new[] (and even malloc) are high-level abstractions hiding a complex machinery that actually gets you the memory.

Aye, i did know about the new and delete relationship, , i think it was missed as i had been looking at C examples and it was just an oversight, as far as non repeating random number generation goes then this is definitely reinvention of wheel as it is surely required a LOT, i just had never known there was a standard library solution for that.
i tell you what it is, sometimes i feel like i am missing out on something. like the challenge of working out your own way of doing it, if someone says oh, just use std::, or whatever, and also its a bit like ready meals versus home cooked, at least you know what went in it haha, and sometimes i avoid it as i read somewhere say that this particular std::thing was inefficient or blah blah, so then i question myself as to whether i am choosing the correct tool...probably better the std:: library than my own humble attempts in all cases though aint it.
and yes i agree, you could keep peeling back the layers on any library function i suppose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laserlight

It looks okay, though it may be easier to write:

Code:

---

void GetDrawNumbers(int total_nums, int drawnums[])
{
    std::set<int> generated_nums;

    for (int i = 0; i < total_nums; ++i)
    {
        int num;
        do
        {
            num = rand() % MAXNUMS + 1;
        }
        while (!generated_nums.insert(num).second);

        drawnums[i] = num;
    }
}

---

---

You could shorten that further too:

Code:

---

void GetDrawNumbers(int total_nums, int drawnums[])
{
    std::set<int> generated_nums;
    while (generated_nums.size() < total_nums)
        generated_nums.insert(rand() % MAXNUMS + 1);

    std::copy(generated_nums.begin(), generated_nums.end(), drawnums);
}

---