Dynamically allocate or waste memory?

I have a 2d integer array used for a tile map.

The size of the map is unknown and read in from a file at runtime. currently the biggest file is 开发者_如何转开发2500 items(50x50 grid).

I have a working method of dynamic memory allocation from an earlier question but people keep saying that it a bad idea so I have been thinking whether or not to just use a big array and not fill it all up when using a smaller map.

Do people know of any pros or cons to either solution ? any advice or personal opinions welcome.

c++ btw

edit: all the maps are made by me so I can pick a max size.

---

Probably the easiest way is for example a std::vector<std::vector<int> > to allow it to be dynamically sized AND let the library do all the allocations for you. This will prevent accidentally leaking memory.

---

My preference would be to dynamically allocate. That way should you encounter a surprisingly large map you (hopefully) won't overflow if you've written it correctly, whereas with the fixed size your only option is to return an error and fail.

Presumably loading tile maps is a pretty infrequent operation. I'd be willing to bet too that you can't even measure a meaningful difference in speed between the two. Unless there is a measurable performance reduction, or you're actually hitting something else which is causing you problems the static sized one seems like a premature optimisation and is asking for trouble later on.

---

It depends entirely on requirements that you haven't stated :-)

• If you want your app to be as blazingly fast as possible, with no ability to handle larger tile maps, then by all means just use a big array. For small PIC-based embedded systems this could be an ideal approach.

• But, if you want your code to be robust, extensible, maintainable and generally suitable for a wider audience, use STL containers.

• Or, if you just want to learn stuff, and have no concern about maintainability or performance, try and write your own dynamically allocating containers from scratch.

---

I believe the issue people refer to with dynamic allocation results from allocating randomly sized blocks of memory and not being able to effectively manage the random sized holes left when deallocated. If you're allocating fixed sized tiles then this may not be an issue.

I see quite a few people suggest allocating a large block of memory and managing it themselves. That might be an alternative solution.

---

Is allocating the memory dynamically a bottleneck in your program? Is it the cause of a performance issue? If not, then simply keep dynamic allocation, you can handle any map size. If yes, then maybe use some data structure that does not deallocate the memory it has allocated but rather use its old buffer and if needed, reallocate more memory.