许多答案都涉及到各种性能考虑因素。我想解决让OP困惑的评论:

不要像Java程序员那样思考。

事实上，在Java中，正如这个问题的答案所解释的那样，

第一次显式创建对象时使用new关键字。

但在c++中，类型为T的对象是这样创建的:T{}(或T{ctor_argument1,ctor_arg2}对于带参数的构造函数)。这就是为什么通常你没有理由想要使用new。

那么，为什么要用它呢?有两个原因:

您需要创建许多值，这些值的数量在编译时是未知的。 由于c++实现在普通机器上的限制-通过分配太多空间来防止堆栈溢出，以常规方式创建值。

现在，除了你引用的评论暗示的内容之外，你应该注意到，即使是上面的两种情况也已经涵盖得很好了，而不必“求助”使用新的自己:

您可以使用来自标准库的容器类型，它们可以保存运行时可变数量的元素(如std::vector)。 您可以使用智能指针，它为您提供一个类似于new的指针，但确保在“指针”超出作用域的地方释放内存。

因此，在c++社区编码指南中，避免显式的new和delete是一个正式的条款:指南R.11。

我想海报的意思是，你不必把所有的东西都分配到堆上，而不是堆栈上。

基本上，对象是在堆栈上分配的(当然，如果对象大小允许的话)，因为堆栈分配的成本较低，而不是基于堆的分配，后者涉及分配器的大量工作，并增加了冗长的内容，因为这样您就必须管理分配在堆上的数据。

我倾向于不同意使用new“too much”的观点。尽管最初的海报使用new with system classes有点可笑。(int *我;I = new int[9999];?真的吗?int [9999];这样就清楚多了。)我想这就是让评论者生气的地方。

When you're working with system objects, it's very rare that you'd need more than one reference to the exact same object. As long as the value is the same, that's all that matters. And system objects don't typically take up much space in memory. (one byte per character, in a string). And if they do, the libraries should be designed to take that memory management into account (if they're written well). In these cases, (all but one or two of the news in his code), new is practically pointless and only serves to introduce confusions and potential for bugs.

When you're working with your own classes/objects, however (e.g. the original poster's Line class), then you have to begin thinking about the issues like memory footprint, persistence of data, etc. yourself. At this point, allowing multiple references to the same value is invaluable - it allows for constructs like linked lists, dictionaries, and graphs, where multiple variables need to not only have the same value, but reference the exact same object in memory. However, the Line class doesn't have any of those requirements. So the original poster's code actually has absolutely no needs for new.

两个原因:

在这种情况下没有必要。您正在使代码不必要地变得更加复杂。 它在堆上分配空间，这意味着您必须记住稍后删除它，否则将导致内存泄漏。

New在堆上分配对象。否则，对象分配在堆栈上。查一下两者的区别。

C++ doesn't employ any memory manager by its own. Other languages like C# and Java have a garbage collector to handle the memory C++ implementations typically use operating system routines to allocate the memory and too much new/delete could fragment the available memory With any application, if the memory is frequently being used it's advisable to preallocate it and release when not required. Improper memory management could lead memory leaks and it's really hard to track. So using stack objects within the scope of function is a proven technique The downside of using stack objects are, it creates multiple copies of objects on returning, passing to functions, etc. However, smart compilers are well aware of these situations and they've been optimized well for performance It's really tedious in C++ if the memory being allocated and released in two different places. The responsibility for release is always a question and mostly we rely on some commonly accessible pointers, stack objects (maximum possible) and techniques like auto_ptr (RAII objects) The best thing is that, you've control over the memory and the worst thing is that you will not have any control over the memory if we employ an improper memory management for the application. The crashes caused due to memory corruptions are the nastiest and hard to trace.