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.

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。

我发现有几个重要的原因让我们忽略了尽量少做新事情:

Operator new的执行时间不确定

调用new可能会导致操作系统为进程分配新的物理页，也可能不会。如果你经常这样做，会很慢。或者它可能已经准备好了一个合适的内存位置;我们不知道。如果你的程序需要具有一致且可预测的执行时间(如在实时系统或游戏/物理模拟中)，你需要避免在时间关键型循环中添加新的元素。

操作符new是一个隐式线程同步

是的，你听到了。你的操作系统需要确保你的页表是一致的，因此调用new会导致你的线程获得一个隐式互斥锁。如果你一直从许多线程调用new，你实际上是在序列化你的线程(我用32个cpu做过这个，每个cpu都调用new来获得几百个字节，哎呦!那是一个需要调试的皇家p.i.t.a.。)

其余的，比如速度慢、碎片化、容易出错等，其他答案已经提到了。

因为堆栈速度更快，而且防漏

在c++中，只需要一条指令就可以为给定函数中的每个局部作用域对象在堆栈上分配空间，而且不可能泄漏任何内存。该评论意图(或应该意图)说“使用堆栈而不是堆”之类的话。

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.

新就是新目标。

Recall why goto is so reviled: while it is a powerful, low-level tool for flow control, people often used it in unnecessarily complicated ways that made code difficult to follow. Furthermore, the most useful and easiest to read patterns were encoded in structured programming statements (e.g. for or while); the ultimate effect is that the code where goto is the appropriate way to is rather rare, if you are tempted to write goto, you're probably doing things badly (unless you really know what you're doing).

New也类似——它经常被用来使事情变得不必要的复杂和难以阅读，最有用的使用模式可以被编码到各种各样的类中。此外，如果您需要使用任何新的使用模式，而这些模式还没有标准类，您可以编写自己的类来编码它们!

我甚至认为new比goto更糟糕，因为需要对new和delete语句进行配对。

像goto一样，如果您认为需要使用new，那么您可能做得很糟糕——特别是如果您在一个类的实现之外这样做，这个类的目的是封装您需要做的任何动态分配。