Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!cerc.utexas.edu!lynch
From: lynch@cerc.utexas.edu (Tom Lynch)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: delete []
Summary: delete takes a type
Keywords: delete class []
Message-ID: <1990Jul27.231220.8396@cerc.utexas.edu>
Date: 27 Jul 90 23:12:20 GMT
References: <641@atcmpe.atcmp.nl>
Sender: Tom Lynch
Followup-To: lynch@cerc.utexas.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Texas at Austin
Lines: 36

In article <641@atcmpe.atcmp.nl> leo@atcmp.nl (Leo  Willems) writes:
>When shifting from 2.0 to 2.1 I found myself in problems with:
>
>func(){
>	classtype *m = new classtype[10];
>
>	delete[10] m;
>}
>
>In 2.0 this works fine, in 2.1 not, that compilers suggests:
>
>	delete [] m;
>
>which indeed works correct. (but not in 2.0, which accepts the code but
>generates a .c file with a syntax error)
>
>Is delete[] indeed the correct way ?
>Should delete[] be accepted by 2.0 or is it new to 2.1?

delete m; would be sufficient.  delete [10] m is redundant

   Stroustrup p 259: 
        "In the form 
             delete [ expression ] expression
          the second expression points to a vector and first
          expression gives the number of elements of that vector.
          Specifying the number of elements is redundant except
          when deleting vectors of certain classes..."
 
 I don't know what delete [] m means.

-tom
lynch@cerc.utexas.edu          Nothing is absolute.

p.s. please send me a note if this posted.  Does anyone use the
     'F' in rn?  should it work?