<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<title>Comments for Using SafeGuards</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/plain" href="http://dn.codegear.com/article/27465" title="Using SafeGuards" />
<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://dn.codegear.com/article/27465/feed" title="Comments for Using SafeGuards" />
<id>http://dn.codegear.com/article/27465</id>
<updated>2008-11-21T16:13:51-08:00</updated>
<entry>
<title>Using SafeGuards</title>
<author>
<name>Uba Liviu</name>
<uri>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/userall?commentid=29398</uri>
</author>
<id>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=29398</id>
<updated>2001-07-12T02:53:34-07:00</updated>
<published>2001-07-12T02:53:34-07:00</published>
<summary>Using SafeGuards</summary>
<content>This kind of safeguards I used to implement myself, and for the code to look nice and clean I didn't declare the interface variables, but I defined functions that return interfaces.It is nicer and the code is more leasible.Regards</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Using SafeGuards</title>
<author>
<name>Jean Rajotte</name>
<uri>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/userall?commentid=29370</uri>
</author>
<id>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=29370</id>
<updated>2001-07-05T09:09:14-07:00</updated>
<published>2001-07-05T09:09:14-07:00</published>
<summary>Using SafeGuards</summary>
<content>Interesting idea.What happens if you use Safeguards on an object but take upon yourself to destroy the object directly.  Will the safeguard code smoke for the invalid pointer?</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>re: Using SafeGuards</title>
<author>
<name>Malcolm Groves</name>
<uri>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/userall?commentid=29340</uri>
</author>
<id>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=29340</id>
<updated>2001-07-02T17:18:46-07:00</updated>
<published>2001-07-02T17:18:46-07:00</published>
<summary>re: Using SafeGuards</summary>
<content>Basically, it changes from &quot;create an object, work with object, free object&quot; to &quot;create object with safeguard, work with object&quot;. You never have to think about freeing the object.There's another twist you can put on this. A similar trick can be done for restoration of object state. Have a look at  http://www.madrigal.com.au/papers/solidcode/page3.htm at the section on TRestore. Also, have a look at http://www.madrigal.com.au/papers/solidcode/page2.htm at the section on Cleaners for a more detailed explanation of the same concept as SafeguardsCheersMalcolm</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Using SafeGuards</title>
<author>
<name>Chris Bruner</name>
<uri>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/userall?commentid=29333</uri>
</author>
<id>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=29333</id>
<updated>2001-07-02T06:48:26-07:00</updated>
<published>2001-07-02T06:48:26-07:00</published>
<summary>Using SafeGuards</summary>
<content>This artical says &quot;Everyone knows code that creates an object, works with the object and frees it again in the same procedure. SafeGuards are especially appropriate in such situations. &quot;It never explains why. I don't know what the advantages of safegaurds are.</content>
</entry>
</feed>
