delete的用法，不是通过new的对象可以delete来销毁吗？为什么？谢谢

[Justin_Song]

delete的用法，不是通过new的对象可以delete来销毁吗？为什么？谢谢

[codingcoding]

new 的对象必须通过free来销毁。语法规定是这么的。不为什么。那你想用什么来销毁呀

[sdjnlf]

不是通过new的对象不能用delete来销毁.new和delete是运算子不是函数，delete 用来删除由new建立的对象，释放指针指向的内存空间.

[bugz]

malloc的可以用delete的。因为默认的分配器是一样的，除非你重载了new
delete运算符

[Lostinet]

奇怪。。
MyClass *pmc=new MyClass();
LPVOID *pvoid=pmc;
delete pvoid;会不会执行 ~MyClass 呢？？

[zdhe]

of course not.

all func (include desctructor) has saved in C++ class vtable (not instance).

your pvoid does not hold any vtable, so never run.

[Lostinet]

我明白为什么desctructor要定义为虚拟的了。。。不然：

CBase
{
...
int ref=0;
CBase(){ref=1}
Release(){ref--;if(ref<=0)delete this};
~CBase(){...}
}
CChild:CBase
{
~CChild()
}
..
如果~CBase不是虚拟的，那么在CBase::Release里面调用delete this不是很容易就变成了调用 ~CBase 了？
是不？

[zdhe]

by default, delete implemented differently from free.
also for malloc(relloc, calloc) with new.

of course, as c++ spec, if not simple type , new can run your constructor. delete will call desctructor.

anyway, any of them at last use same logic as HeapAlloc.

[导工]

不知大家有没有试过
#include <iostream.h>
class a
{
public:
a()
{cout<<"construct"<<endl;}
~a()
{cout<<"destruct"<<endl;}
void f(void)
{cout<<"abc"<<endl;}
};

int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
a *p;
p=new a();
p->f();
delete p;
return 0;
}

结果是:

construct
abc
destruct