I have a problem when trying to delete a vector of pointers:
std::vector<float*> *v;
v = new std::vector<float*>;
v->assign(2, new float[2]);
for (int i = 0; i < 2; ++i)
{
delete[] v->at(i);
}
delete v;
I'm deleting each element from the whole vector, but I still get an assert. Can you please tell me what I'm doing wrong?
Thank you in advance.
This doesn't do what you think it does:
v->assign(2, new float[2]);
One array of size 2 is allocated, then two pointers to it are stored in the vector. When you delete, the same pointer is deleted twice.
If you want a multidimensional array, you could try std::vector< std::array< float, 2 > >. Doing new and delete yourself are a code smell. (The same goes for new vector …; that is probably not what you really want.)
new vector is not making a pointer to the std::vector?
std::shared_ptr or std::unique_ptr.THe v->assign(2, new float[2]) does the same as :
float *f = new float[2];
for(int i = 0; i < 2; i++)
v->push_back(f);
of course, that's MOST likely not what you want - you probably want:
for(int i = 0; i < 2; i++)
{
float *f = new float[2];
v->push_back(f);
}
And using new on vector is just plain wrong - just use a plain vector. Inside it, put a vector<float> - or, if you just want two elements every time, use something like:
struct f2 { float a; float b; };
vector<struct f2> v;
In general, having raw owning pointers is not a good idea (unless in special cases, like when you are defining some custom high-performance highly-specialized data structure).
In your code - unless you are in special cases - there should be no explicit calls to new and delete, in modern C++11/14.
Your code sample style seems more like Java and other garbage-collection-based reference-semantics-based languages style. Instead, C++ tends to prefer value semantics (e.g. prefer: MyClass x; to MyClass * px = new MyClass();, and if you really need some owning pointer, use smart pointers like std::shared_ptr or std::unique_ptr):
// Your original code:
//
// std::vector<float*> *v;
// v = new std::vector<float*>;
//
// Not good, since:
//
// 1. You have a std::vector of owning pointers
// (std::vector<float *>)
//
// 2. You have a raw owning pointer for the containing std::vector itself
// (v = new std::vector<....>)
//
A more modern and correct way of writing your code can be using a vector of vectors (instead of a vector of raw owning pointers float*):
//
// Vector of vectors (i.e. 2D matrix), allocated on the stack
// Note: no raw owning pointers here.
//
vector<vector<float>> v;
Then you can use use std::vector::push_back() or some other std::vector methods to populate the vector.
As a more high-performance and less-overhead alternative for a 2D matrix, you could use a single 1D std::vector, and linearize the content of the 2D matrix in a single 1D contiguous vector, of size Rows * Columns, e.g.:
vector<float> matrix;
matrix.resize( Rows * Columns );
And to access element at position (rowIndex, columnIndex), you can use a formula like this (if you store matrix elements row-wise, i.e. row#1, row#2, ..., row#N):
indexInVector = columnIndex + rowIndex * Columns;
All this can be nicely wrapped in a class template template <typename T> class Matrix {...};, with proper methods to read and write matrix elements, and the containing std::vector<T> as data member.