为什么将一个对象指针传递给一个方法，它在哪里被删除，不同于直接删除对象？ [英] Why passing an object pointer to a method, where it is deleted, is different from deleting the object directly?

问题描述

导致一个块泄漏的代码如下：

The code causing a leak of one block is as follows:

    in = new RandomAccessFile(fileName, "r");
    in->close();
    Mem::delObject(in);

其中 RandomAccessFile 是类 string 字段， delObject（）是一个静态方法，如下所示：

where RandomAccessFile is the class with the string field, and delObject() is a static method as follows:

    void Mem::delObject(Object* object) {
        delete object;
    }

泄漏的块是 string 。

如果我用直接 delete delObject $ c>：

If I replace the method delObject with a direct delete:

    in = new RandomAccessFile(fileName, "r");
    in->close();
    delete(in);

泄漏消失了。如果方法未替换，而是替换为：

the leak is gone. If the method is not replaced, but removed instead:

    in = new RandomAccessFile(fileName, "r");
    in->close();
    // Mem::delObject(in);
    // delete(in);

有两个泄漏块。我想这个字段和包含它的对象。

there are two leaked blocks. I guess the field and the object that contained it.

那么，为什么这两种方式删除一个对象的行为不同？

So: why these two ways of deleting an object behave differently?

推荐答案

我只能猜测，但似乎你忘了一个对象类中的虚拟析构函数。因此，不会调用RandomAccessFile析构函数导致其属性泄漏。

I can only guess but it seems you forgot a virtual destructor in Object class. Thus the RandomAccessFile destructor won't be called causing a leak of its properties.

这篇关于为什么将一个对象指针传递给一个方法，它在哪里被删除，不同于直接删除对象？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！