Is it better to use heap or stack variables?

Question

An experienced C++ user told me that I should strive for using heap variables, i.e.:

A* obj = new A("A");

as opposed to:

A obj("A");

Aside from all that stuff about using pointers being nice and flexible, he said it's better to put things on the heap rather than the stack (something about the stack being smaller than the heap?). Is it true? If so why?

NB: I know about issues with lifetime. Let's assume I have managed the lifetime of these variables appropriately. (i.e. the only criteria of concern is heap vs. stack storage with no lifetime concern)

Answer 1

Depending on the context we can consider heap or stack. Every thread gets a stack and the thread executes instructions by invoking functions. When a function is called, the function variables are pushed to stack. And when the function returns the stack rollbacks and memory is reclaimed. Now there is a size limitation for the thread local stack, it varies and can be tweaked to some extent. Considering this if every object is created on stack and the object requires large memory, then the stack space will exhaust resulting to stackoverflow error. Besides this if the object is to be accessed by multiple threads then storing such object on stack makes no sense.

Thus small variables, small objects who's size can be determine at compile time and pointers should be stored on stack. The concern of storing objects on heap or free store is, memory management becomes difficult. There are chances of memory leak, which is bad. Also if application tries to access an object which is already deleted, then access violation can happen which can cause application crash.

C++11 introduces smart pointers (shared, unique) to make memory management with heap easier. The actual referenced object is on heap but is encapsulation by the smart pointer which is always on the stack. Hence when the stack rollbacks during function return event or during exception the destructor of smart pointer deletes the actual object on heap. In case of shared pointer the reference count is maintained and the actually object is deleted when the reference count is zero. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_pointer