One of the things that frequently amuses me/drives me into a rage is the modern mentality that any old design pattern is bad, so don't learn it. Then code breaks, we old timers nod and say "yes, that sounds about right", and get back "why is programming so hard? I'm going to fix it so it's easy!"
The article I'm reading right now is about a fellow who documents his battle to understand a kernel level crash that ultimately boiled down to a race causing a use-after-free. For those who don't know, this is exactly what it sounds like. You allocated some memory, then you freed it, then you accessed that pointer after the free. This is very bad and causes everything from security exploits to system crashes, because after a free the system is allowed to do anything it likes with that memory location, including re-allocating it, or marking it illegal because the address space is needed elsewhere.
Use-after-free is controlled by having a clear memory policy. This is a design concept wherein you have a set policy that defines unambiguously who owns a block of allocated memory at any given time. Some systems may have multiple owners - in this case you need a management system such as smart pointers. Some systems may pass ownership from one function to the next - in this case it's usually wise for the code which is losing ownership to forget that pointer as soon as possible. For instance, you can null it out - then you /can't/ accidentally use it. There is literally no reason to remember an address once it has been freed - null that pointer.
This also helps a lot with memory /leaks/. If you know who owns a block of memory, then that implies quite strongly who is responsible for /deleting/ that block when it's no longer required.
This is all a design concept - nothing happens in code until you decide it. And once decided, no exceptions. Exceptions cause bugs. And besides, if you need exceptions, that means your design doesn't fit the application and needs to be rethought. My personal observation is that my design isn't right till the third time I implement it. Less than that, and I get nervous. It's like having your code build and run the first time - you should be thinking 'Oh no. What did I miss?' ;)
Stable, reliable code beats buggy code that's 0.001% faster on Tuesdays. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. You'll thank yourself when those good night sleeps start taking the place of early morning panic calls and late night debug sessions.
Although I do agree with how the fellow ended it. I'm not naming him cause my rant isn't really his fault, and ended up a little off topic, but kudos, bud.
"Just go to sleep, because everything is broken anyways :)"