"Paul Rubin" <no.em...@nospam.invalid> wrote in messagenews:email@example.com...
> "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...@notemailnotz.cnm> writes:Ah, that'd be a different meaning ...
> >> assembler and C days we relied on static allocation (which worked
> >> perfectly) and in my later higher-level language (VB and .Net) it was
> >> handled automagically.
> > It's "automagically" done for you in C too....
> > malloc() and free() ...
> I think "automagically" in HLL's these days means "garbage collected".
> I get the impression that in C++11, smart pointers (i.e. referenceJust how "equivalent" is equivalent?
> counted) are included in the standard library and generally considered
> preferable to manual allocation with new and delete (equivalent to
It's my understanding from what I've read that coding an operating system in
I'll take it that you mean that new and delete are used in C++ for memory
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.