Your basic assumption is incorrect. The size of the object does not increase with the number of virtual functions. If the class has ANY virtual functions then it has a single pointer to a vtable for that class. The size of the object won’t change beyond that regardless how many virtual functions: struct s0 {}; … Read more
I won’t go into too much detail, but “client.dll”+0065F38 won’t help you too much. Luckily for you, I wrote a tutorial of how to write a trainer in C#. 2 solved Find address using pointer and offset C# [closed]
There is no garbage collector in either language. At least, not as part of standard compliant implementations. Note that C++ had language restrictions which made it hard to implement garbage collection. Some of those rules have been relaxed in the latest standard, C++11. So in principle it would be possible to implement a standards compliant … Read more
From section 7.20.3.2 The free function of the C99 standard: The free function causes the space pointed to by ptr to be deallocated, that is, made available for further allocation. If ptr is a null pointer, no action occurs. Otherwise, if the argument does not match a pointer earlier returned by the calloc, malloc, or … Read more
The simple answer is eventually: no sooner, no later. You have no direct control over when garbage will be collected. Provided the instance has no more references to it, the garbage collector will clean it up at some point. 4 solved When will objects allocated on a thread be freed after the thread completes? [closed]
The problem is because you are not allocating new memory in operator* strcpy and strcat assume that char array is large enough to contain the resulting string. You should allocate enough memory so it is done in constructors. 2 solved Overloading * operator for string in C++ [closed]
Your initDictionary doesn’t return the pointer dictionary anywhere. That means when you do Dictionary* dictionary = initDictionary(); the value of dictionary will be indeterminate (seemingly random or garbage), and dereferencing this pointer or passing it to free will result in undefined behavior. You solve this by adding a simple return dictionary; at the end of … Read more
Assuming the “Student” type is a reference type (class), and not a value type (struct): Student s = new Student(); Memory for a new Student object is allocated, and a new reference “s” is created and set to refer to the new memory. Student s2 = s; A new reference “s2” is created and set … Read more
Java strings are immutable. Every time you do: s+=c; You’re really saying: s = new String(s + c); new String(s + c) must allocate a string of length s + 1, or: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … etc. Since Sum(1..N) == (n + 1) (n / 2), this is O(n^2). … Read more
According to the C++ Standard (8.3.4 Arrays) 1…An object of array type contains a contiguously allocated non-empty set of N subobjects of type T. Applying to the array definition from your post it means only that four pointers (the elements of the array) to string literals are allocated in contiguous extent of memory. This extent … Read more
“Which is better” is always a matter of opinion. In your particular application, is execution time or memory use more of a problem? Then optimize for that aspect. In terms of leetcode, I understand it’s a sort of quiz, but for numbers that small, my response is “who cares?”. I don’t care about an execution-time … Read more
What will be the value in float if I have a binary number as 1111111111111111 and the storage formats used by Intel processors is 32 bits? [closed] solved What will be the value in float if I have a binary number as 1111111111111111 and the storage formats used by Intel processors is 32 bits? [closed]
Your problem is your placement of free(copy), move it after you make use of copy, otherwise you are attempting to read from a variable that has already been freed (an uninitialized value – invoking Undefined Behavior), (as @Pras correctly notes you free (copy), not free (origin), e.g. #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <stdio.h> int main(){ … Read more
That is not how modern operating systems work. You cannot simply read out the systems ram, because applications memory is virtualized and also the OS prohibits direct access due to security policies. The OS may offer some API to access other processes memory (assumed you have the rights to do). On Win32Api this is ReadProcessMemory. … Read more
Yes, you are defining your array right. You have a bug elsewhere in your code outside the part that constitutes your question. solved Strangeness with dynamic arrays in C++ [closed]