Is it normal that after deleting a dynamic variable from memory, its address can still be obtained? enter image description here

Closed due to the fact that the essence of the issue is not clear by the participants user194374, pavel , aleksandr barakin , Nicolas Chabanovsky ♦ Aug 7 '16 at 5:49 .

Try to write more detailed questions. To get an answer, explain what exactly you see the problem, how to reproduce it, what you want to get as a result, etc. Give an example that clearly demonstrates the problem. If the question can be reformulated according to the rules set out in the certificate , edit it .

  • four
    this is not quite normal when you take screenshots instead of code - strangeqargo
  • 2
    Welcome to Stack Overflow in Russian ! It is better to provide textual information in the form of text, not images: it is more convenient to read, and search engines will index it. You can change the question by clicking the edit below question text. - aleksandr barakin

2 answers 2

Yes, it is normal and even allowed.

In your case, you get the address is not a remote memory, and the pointer , which is not deleted at all. You have a - only a pointer to the memory that you allocate, and he, like any variable, also has an address.

“Remote” variable - *a . To her, you, oddly enough, could also appeal. (But remote variables cannot be accessed. The compiler trusts you and does not track these hits, so they are on your conscience.)

    Full Here was a metaphorical detailed answer to this topic (in English): https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6441218/can-a-local-variables-memory-be-accessed-outside-its-scope/6445794#6445794

    Usually, after removing a dynamic variable, it is recommended to reset the pointer to it so that its address is no longer available.