Overriding operator new/delete in derived class

Question

I have a stateless, abstract base class from which various concrete classes inherit. Some of these derived classes are stateless as well. Because many of them are created during a run, I'd like to save memory and overhead by having all stateless derived classes emulate a singleton, by overriding operator new()/delete(). A simplified example would look something like this:

#include <memory>

struct Base {
  virtual ~Base() {}
 protected:
  Base() {}   // prevent concrete Base objects
};

struct D1 : public Base {  // stateful object--default behavior
  int dummy;
};

struct D2 : public Base {  // stateless object--don't allocate memory
  void* operator new(size_t size)
  {
    static D2 d2;
    return &d2;
  }
  void operator delete(void *p) {}
};

int main() {
  Base* p1 = new D1();
  Base* p2 = new D1();
  Base* s1 = new D2();
  Base* s2 = new D2();
  delete p1;
  delete p2;
  delete s1;
  delete s2;
  return 0;
}

This example doesn't work: delete s2; fails because delete s1; called ~Base(), which deallocated the shared Base in d2. This can be addressed by adding the same trick with new/delete overloading to Base. But I'm not sure this is the cleanest solution, or even a correct one (valgrind doesn't complain, FWIW). I'd appreciate advice or critique.

edit: actually, the situation is worse. The Base class in this example isn't abstract, as I claimed. If it's made abstract, through the addition of a pure virtual method, then I can no longer apply the new/delete overriding trick, because I cannot have a static variable of type Base. So I don't have any solution for this problem!

Answer 1

I would say the best solution here is to make your derived class an actual singleton. Make your derived constructor private and just provide a static Base* getInstance() method that either creates the required object or returns the static instance. This way the only way to get a D1 object would be via this method since calling new D1 would be illegal.

Answer 2

You just can't do that - that would violate "object identity" requirement that states that each object must have its own address. You have to allocate distinct memory block to each object - this can be done rather fast if you override operator new to use a fast block allocator specifically tailored for objects of fixed size.