﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <description><![CDATA[Comments for Using SafeGuards]]></description>
    <title><![CDATA[Comments for Using SafeGuards]]></title>
    <link>http://dn.codegear.com/article/27465</link>
    <!-- source: http://dn.codegear.com/article/27465/feed-->
    <dc:date>2008-11-21T13:33:12-08:00</dc:date>
    <item>
      <description><![CDATA[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]]></description>
      <title><![CDATA[Using SafeGuards]]></title>
      <managingEditor>
	 (Uba Liviu)
</managingEditor>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=29398</guid>
      <dc:date>2001-07-12T02:53:34-07:00</dc:date>
      <pubDate>2001-07-12T02:53:34-07:00</pubDate>
      <source url="http://dn.codegear.com/article/27465/feed">Comments for Using SafeGuards</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <description><![CDATA[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?]]></description>
      <title><![CDATA[Using SafeGuards]]></title>
      <managingEditor>
	 (Jean Rajotte)
</managingEditor>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=29370</guid>
      <dc:date>2001-07-05T09:09:14-07:00</dc:date>
      <pubDate>2001-07-05T09:09:14-07:00</pubDate>
      <source url="http://dn.codegear.com/article/27465/feed">Comments for Using SafeGuards</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <description><![CDATA[Basically, it changes from "create an object, work with object, free object" to "create object with safeguard, work with object". 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]]></description>
      <title><![CDATA[re: Using SafeGuards]]></title>
      <managingEditor>
	 (Malcolm Groves)
</managingEditor>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=29340</guid>
      <dc:date>2001-07-02T17:18:46-07:00</dc:date>
      <pubDate>2001-07-02T17:18:46-07:00</pubDate>
      <source url="http://dn.codegear.com/article/27465/feed">Comments for Using SafeGuards</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <description><![CDATA[This artical says "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. "It never explains why. I don't know what the advantages of safegaurds are.]]></description>
      <title><![CDATA[Using SafeGuards]]></title>
      <managingEditor>
	 (Chris Bruner)
</managingEditor>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=29333</guid>
      <dc:date>2001-07-02T06:48:26-07:00</dc:date>
      <pubDate>2001-07-02T06:48:26-07:00</pubDate>
      <source url="http://dn.codegear.com/article/27465/feed">Comments for Using SafeGuards</source>
    </item>
    <generator>Atom 1.0 XSLT Transform v1 (http://atom.geekhood.net)</generator>
  </channel>
</rss>