😂

Lol

Useless comment stating the obvious

Gilpow he’s just being a nice guy and giving Cherno a compliment. Which is something we need more of in this cold, heartless world.

there isn't any real competition!!!!

@gilpow check thenewboston, you will be forced to take back your words.

@@jscorpio1987 *brainless world.

→The delete keyword also calls the destructor.

best comment

- The* Charno* The Great! xD

It's really true if you just want something that works use python or some other language. Coding isn't about "pick your favourite language and stick to it". You pick the language that's best for what you're doing

Sai Surisetti I think I don't fit the criteria... I started learning C++ because it has more data structures than Python, it's a common language and Python hates recursive functions. Python has that nasty recursion limit of 1000. And even if I increase that limit (with setrecursionlimit function), it won't go to 50,000.

@@darkbolt333 I started learning C++ because it worked with hardware the best, for arduino. But then when I really got started with C++ I loved the syntax and I hate the Python syntax.

just here to learn the syntax for fun idk might be going to jail now

We talk about in soon™

One day it will be complete!

Don't give him a hard time :D, I'm sure he'll go over the advanced topics once he's gone through the basics. As he said, he's trying to make the series as perfect as he wants

no worry, take your time, excellent video as usual

..or he could make one 10 hour video that no one would watch and get it all in one shot.

Those are actually about data structures, it's not something about the C++ itself.

I wouldn't say they are "really important". Yes, they are a phenomenal way to implement sequential data when you know you will be performing many insertions and concatenation. As well as when you want to implement something like a tree. But in day to day you are either going to use them because they are your language's preferred way to handle lists, like Haskell or Scala. Or you are not really going to use them very much. They actually tend to get overused by beginners. Since when all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail. Most of the time a Dynamic Array (So a Vector in C++) is what we really want. You wouldn't default to storing you data in a linked list unless you have a particular optimization or algorithm in mind you would want to use

+Роман Капуста yes

Well unless the program is selected by the user at the time. I read that every process in the computer is being maintained by the cpu just flopping through them very very quickly over and over; programs unselected by the user are just put on pause if they have that feature in them, I guess.

Thanks. Good point =)

but you can use free()

Yes, there is

Thread stacks are usually native, it's usually heap allocations that need the OS's help

for (unsigned short i = 0; i < 50; i++) { std::cout

Probably heap. Stack has a limited and small memory. Trying to put large object or large amounts of them there is probably not gonna end well. I guess in a case like this you would probably use some optimization strategy to make it more manageable for the program (like in optimized)? I am a beginner at C++ so take this guess with a grain of salt, but maybe on this case you make a bigger allocation (maybe even use a big allocation that you made beforehand) and put all of these inside that? Like a big mob's pool? I can imagine something like that being done with placement new and pointer arithmetic... That said, I am probably just saying a bunch of nonsense that anyone that actually understands about this and is reading this comment is probably going "WTF are you even talking bout?!" XD. I still think it would be on the heap though.

malloc doesn't call the constructor

+Matthew Sanetra not in that way, since you program won't be able to access memory outside its process. There are however OS API functions you can call that can achieve stuff like that.

Thanks for the reply!

@@matthewsanetra my wife had a low-level code course which included homework with , _halfway_ through the instructions, a warning that "if you use the wrong memory address you might overwrite operating system instructions and have to re-install your OS". _Not_ a good university.

@@williamchamberlain2263 WTF?! LOL XD Who the hell thought that was a good idea?

@@ultimatedragon4281 someone who didn't want to set up lab equipment

The pointer itself is stored on the stack, but the memory it's pointing to is on the heap.

Yes, when we start talking about cross-platform development.

TheChernoProject Awesome! Love your videos, keep it up!

Any time creates a brand new func or class, he calls them definitions. There's a difference between Def and init/declaration

@Peterolen Thanks!!

you cant really do it. Lets say you have a file or something, you load that data to an heap array and you want to delete half of it. For beginers its really obvious, you just add half of the size to the pointer and delete it, however it wont work. It wont work because the system gives you a pointer and also it associate that memory with that pointer. If it gives you a pointer X, you can not request deleting a pointer X+1, this memory address might be inside the block that you have allocated but the system does not associate any previous allocation with that, so it wont remove it. Valid tactic is to just copy that half of memory you want to keep to another block of allocated memory (this time you allocate only as much as you need to store that half) with ex. memcpy, and then you delete the original pointer. Its a good thing to store your base pointer somewhere else, like in a different variable so you always can reach and use that original one. Hope I helped, sorry for any mistakes but Im just a hobbyist :)

I wrote a big comment about that and it got deleted, so I am mad. If you are running the program with memory safety features and you aren't allocating too much memory (simple applications), the OS will free the memory when the process finishes (usually the case). if you are running the program without these safety features (simple systems that sacrifice that for performance like embedded systems or something like running linux in kernel mode), then it won't be freed even after the program ends and it can take up all your memory with time and/or multiple executions. Applications that allocate a lot of memory and/or don't control exactly how much they allocate (like if allocate inside an unbounded loop) can actually end up taking so much memory that they bring the entire system to a crawl or just get killed by the OS for taking too much memory. IF the don't delete a.k.a. free the memory after using it. Remember that a smaller application or code of today can become part of the code or a module of a bigger program tomorrow, in which case even smaller and simpler programs (when first written) can actually cause a lot of problems later (when incorporated on the bigger one) because of not freeing their memory. It is also good practice to free the memory (clean after yourselves programmers!). tl;dr : Just free your damn memory! Always!