[jb1991]

No, it’s not just theory. Like anything in C++, codebases and their styles widely vary. But my comment holds true for the vast majority of developers I have worked with over the last decade. With the exception of the special “placement new“ operator, it is nearly obsolete to use new and delete.

[pjmlp]

I suggest browsing around code from Microsoft, Google, Apple,...

Plus there are those tons of enteprise code, hardly the "vast majority".

The only place I see modern C++ as advocated, it at C++ conference talks, and my own hobby coding.

[kps]

Hmm, I was at G until the recent decimation, and would have been surprised to see `new`, especially in new (heh) code, because it immediately raises the question of ownership, which means it costs time for every future reader.

Taking chromium as a proxy (though the style isn't identical), there are currently 5 or 6 times as many `make_unique` as `new`. (Some false positives on the word ‘new’ in strings, because I don't remember how to exclude them.)

https://source.chromium.org/search?q=\bnew\b%20lang:c%2B%2B%...

https://source.chromium.org/search?q=\bmake_unique\b%20lang:...

[pjmlp]

Now search for C arrays and strings, old style enums, str...() and mem...() functions, C style casts, preprocessor macros,..

[jb1991]

That’s called whataboutism.

[pjmlp]

Nope, it is called experience with large code and teams.

[jb1991]

We are talking about one very specific issue, the point of this thread is a joke about new and delete. And your response after evidence services against your position is, “what about all these other things?” Definition of whataboutism.

[jb1991]

If you are going to work with a legacy codebase, then sure. My comment was more about fresh codebases, which are fortunately the only ones I've worked on.

[pjmlp]

A niche in the C++ world.