是一个很好的做法，通过指针到const释放内存 [英] Is it a good practice to free memory via a pointer-to-const

问题描述

有很多问题讨论C和C ++处理指针到const删除的细节，即 free（）不接受它们，而 delete 和 delete [] ，并且const不会阻止对象破坏。

There are many questions discussing the details of C and C++ dealing with pointer-to-const deletion, namely that free() does not accept them and that delete and delete[] do and that constness doesn't prevent object destruction.

我感兴趣的是你是否认为这是一个好的做法，而不是语言（C和C ++）允许的。

What I am interested on is whether you think it is a good practice to do so, not what the languages (C and C++) allow.

参数指针到const删除包括：

Arguments for pointer-to-const deletion include:

• Linus Torvalds' kfree（）不像C的 free（），需要一个 void const * 参数，因为他认为释放内存不会影响什么是指向。


• free（）是在引入const关键字之前设计的。


• C ++的删除操作符允许删除const数据。

• Linus Torvalds' kfree(), unlike C's free(), takes a void const* argument because he thinks that freeing the memory does not affect what is pointed to.
• free() was designed before the introduction of the const keyword.
• C++'s delete operators allow deletion of const data.

它的参数包括：

• 程序员不希望数据在传递指针到常量时被修改（或删除）。




• 这是大多数库和现有代码中常见的做法。
>

• Programmers do not expect data to be modified (or deleted) when they pass a pointer-to-const to it.
• Many think that pointer-to-const implies not getting ownership of the data (but not that non-const would imply getting ownership).
• This is the common practice seen in most libraries and existing code.

请在回答中说得很清楚，并且可能会涉及当局。我的意图是不要在这里开始投票。

Please argument well in your responses and possibly refer to authorities. My intention is not to start a poll here.

推荐答案

这里有一些相关的东西可能太长，

Well, here's some relevant stuff possibly too long to fit into a comment:

1. 前一段时间以前通过指针到const释放内存的做法是被禁止的，参见 这个博士。

1. Some time ago the practice to free memory via a pointer-to-const was plain forbidden, see this dr. Dobb's article, the "Language Law" ( :)) part.

有两次有关 href =http://groups.google.ru/group/comp.lang.c++.moderated =nofollow> http://groups.google.ru/group/comp.lang.c++.moderated a>： 删除常量指针？ ， 为什么可以在const指针 （实际上处理有问题的情况，即指向const的指针）上调用operator delete。

There has twice been a relevant discussion on http://groups.google.ru/group/comp.lang.c++.moderated: "Delete a const pointer?", "Why can operator delete be called on a const pointer" (both actually deal with the case in question, i.e. pointer to const).

我自己的观点（因为你要求参数）：任何给定上下文中的操作的可能性由（在文档中显式或隐式定义）或

My own point (since you are asking for arguments): possibility of the operation in question in any given context is defined by the (explicitly or implicitly defined in the documentation) contract of a class or a function, not by just the method signature or parameter types.

这篇关于是一个很好的做法，通过指针到const释放内存的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！