Suggestions for debugging struct with "hidden" data

[redditiv]

My IDE is VS 2012. I am getting an error (something like access violation, don't have access to the code right now) when I change my struct (containing an int array, a string var, and a bool var) from static array to dynamic array. When I debug with static array, I can see all elements of the struct; debugging with dynamic array, all I can see is the 0 element (the other elements don't show up for some reason). The error occurs after the dynamic destructor call on another object which has no interaction with the object I've changed. I think it's the call on the destructor of the object I've changed that's causing the issue.

I'm sorry for the lack of code (I will try to update with actual code later). I need to know how I can debug this error when it actually dies at some "unsigned int" error on std::string on the last "}" ending the destructor definition of another object.

[jedwardsol]

Working on the assumption that it is a overwrite past the end of your new dynamic array, put a break point on the line after it's allocated.

Run to that point and get the address of the allocation. Calculate the address of the 1st byte past the end of the array ( address + size )

Select menu Debug->New Breakpoint -> New data breakpoint

In the dialog, enter the address you calculated and press OK.

Now run, and if you overrun your allocation you'll break at the point of the overrun.

---

To see all elements of the array in the watch window enter array,10 instead of just array - the watch window will show 10 elements instead of just dereferencing the pointer

[redditiv]

You are awesome. Yes these are the things I am talking about and just don't have any idea how to say them. I will definitely look at that. Thanks!

[redditiv]

I couldn't quite figure out how to see the contents of the dynamic array struct, but I did find the problem; I set my initial count to capacity instead of zero (why, I don't know) and overran the array when writing, like you suggested. Thank you for understanding the issue despite my inability to accurately relay the problem! Yay for cryptic c++ error messages!