On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Andrew Brunner <andrew.t.brun...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok. I think I understand the discrepancy in our reasoning. The issue > is when exceptions are raised during Obj.Free. I think it would help > if you would assume that all exceptions raised in Obj.Free were > handled - since my assertion is all developers using a non-managed > platform like FPC. I'm saying that because if memory is allocated, > and deallocated you will not blow-out the memory manager in FPC. > Meaning, if you catch your exceptions FATAL errors will not even occur > and there will be NO NEED to worry about restarting an application.
But, even using nested handled the memory may be impaired so, you need restarting the application. > Its a clean way of thinking. I have no worries. When I call Obj.Free > it can raise exceptions, and still recover to the calling methods - > whether we are talking about ObjX.free or ObjX.DoSomething. > > My basic point is that just because an exception is raised does not > mean the method will blow-out. It will be handled. LOL... With > exception handling (often nested) where required. Your application will continue running, if that is what you meant when you said not to worry. But the memory may not be 100%, even using nested handled. MD. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
