Printable View
I've defined a new new and delete operator in an include called "defines.h". However, suddenly all files of my project, even those that don't include "defines.h" use the new new and delete operators.
This wouldn't be so much of a problem if not even the memory track functions I use "in" those operators would be affected.
Is there any way how I can request that the default new and delete operators are used?
Maybe define your new operators under some namespace... that way you could always use the scope-resolution operator to control what version of new and delete you are trying to call.
Thanks for that idea!
Did I understand this right that I'll have to change my exsiting code to use something like myspace::delete ?
I tried std::delete before, but that gave me a compiler error. Sure namespaces apply to operators at all ?
Also, does anyone know why my own delete and new operators are known to cpp's that don't even include the header? Is that correct C++ behaviour? Just wondering because it "seems" strange.
Well, it is not that strange. The operators are known of all C++ sources because it is in the standard.
Therefore, when you define a new operator at global scope, it is used. The same applies to delete. They are global operators.
Anyway, you should have got an error from your linker saying that the function is already defined in another object file.
mhm, thanks for your help.
I kind of "solved" the problem with the help of global variables. I just set a boolean while I'm in the "new" new - operator and make it not track mem allocation while this boolean is set. So I prevent the tracking of allocations of my own memory tracker (which lead to infinite recursion).
It's pretty ugly though and I better not even think of what happens if threads are used. Anyway, I'm getting accustomed to this kind of code in C :(
I might have missed something, but why didn't you use a namespace after it was suggested?
Because I didn't want to change my existing code. These operators are merely debug tools. They keep track of allocations and log stuff like double deletions or undeleted memory. If I used namespaces, I'd need to change my entire code once I want to compile a "release" version.Quote:
Originally posted by HybridM
I might have missed something, but why didn't you use a namespace after it was suggested?
At the moment, I just need to include a file to enable debugging features.
After some thinking, I'm not sure it would work if you put it in a namespace...