On Wed, 27 Apr 2011, Alexander Klenin wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 18:15, <[email protected]> wrote:
That's a hack to work around the fact that some destructors may
access the object being destroyed via the given pointer instead of
directly.
Can you explain this ?
Because to my understanding the code does exactly the same.
No, these two procedures perform assignment and destruction in a
different order -- even their names reflect that.
Yes, I have seen that, but why is this relevant ?
I mean, if one does
FreeAndNil(MyObject);
It really doesn't matter whether the reference MyObject is set to nil before
or after the call to Free ?
Michael.
--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
