Java和C＃中的内存管理有何不同？

Question

I was reading through 2010 CWE/SANS Top 25 Most Dangerous Programming Errors and one of the entries is for Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input . It suggests using a language with features to prevent or mitigate this problem, and says:

For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer.

I was not aware that Java and C# differed in any meaningful way with regard to memory management. How is it that Java is not subject to buffer overflows, while C# only protects against overflows? And how is it possible to disable this protection in C#?

Answer 1

java does not support raw pointers (strictly speaking it does not support pointer arithmetic).

In C#, you can use unsafe code and pointers , and unmanaged memory, which makes buffer overruns possible. See unsafe keyword.

To maintain type safety and security, C# does not support pointer arithmetic, by default. However, by using the unsafe keyword, you can define an unsafe context in which pointers can be used. For more information about pointers, see the topic Pointer types .

Answer 2

Good Answers. I would add that Java depends on usage of stack or heap memory locations. C# does as well. The idea of using raw pointers is an addition to C# that comes from it's C code background. Although C# and C / C++ are not the same code language, they do share some commonalities semantics. The idea of using "unsafe" code allows you to avoid keeping large objects on the heap where memory is limited to around 2GB per runtime instance (for C# per CLR, for Java per JVM instance) without incurring dramatic performance degradation due to garbage collection. In some cases you can use C#'s ability to leverage unsafe or manually managed memory pointers to get around the fact there are not near as many third party tools for problems like caching outside of the heap.

I would caution that if you do use unsafe code be sure to get familiar with "Disposable Types" and "Finalizers". This can be a rather advanced practice and the ramifications of not disposing of your objects properly is the same as with C code ... the dreaded MEMORY LEAK. Repercussions are you run out of memory for your app and it falls over (not good). That is why C# does not allow it by default and that you need to override any usage of manually controlled pointers with the "unsafe" keyword. This ensures that any manually handled memory is intentional. Put on your C-code hat when dealing with the "unsafe" keyword.

A great reference to this was in the chapter "Understanding Object Lifetime" in "Pro C# 2010 and the .Net Platform" by Andrew Troelsen. If you prefer online references see the MSDN Website Implementing Finalize and Dispose to Clean Up Unmanaged Resources

One final note - Unmanaged memory is released in the finalizer portion of your object (~ObjectName(){...}). These patterns do add overhead to performance so if you are dealing with lower latency scenarios you may be best served by keeping objects light. If you are dealing with human response then you should be fine to consider this where absolutely necessary.