[lug] new operator in C++

[Scott A. Herod]

Peter Hutnick wrote:
> 
> Let me preface my comments by saying that I am inexperienced, naive, and
> un-knowledgeable programmer, so when I use question marks below I am really
> asking a question.
> 
> Isn't initializing /everything/ within the code the only responsible thing to
> do?  Preferably to a logical nonsense value that you can easily test for?

Absolutely!  Imagine the case:

class c {
     c( void );
    ~c( void );
     object* _op;
};

c::c() {}
c::~c() { delete _op; }
int main() {
    C* c = new C();
    delete c;
}

Admittedly, I've done at least two bad-things(TM), but this code will
potentially corrupt memory.

Scott

> That, of course, would have no impact on whether you should code to depend on
> that behavior.
> 
> Can anyone tell me where my thinking is off track here?
> 
> - -Peter