On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 17:54:13 +0200, Martin Krüger
wrote:
I introduced an boolean-option to the destructor of a class.
Actually, you seem to be violating basic object oriented paradigms here. An
object should always know from its current state how to destruct itself, so
why should a destructor
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010, Martin Krüger wrote:
Hi
I introduced an boolean-option to the destructor of a class. I
implemented a wrapper without argument for reason of
backward-compability.
This wrapper calls the real destructor with default argument.
Everything worked fine until fpc 2.4 (sampl
Al 30/10/10 17:54, En/na Martin Krüger ha escrit:
So my question:
Is it a bug or am i doing something i should not?
The compiler gives me am note:
test.pas(8,3) Note: Class should have one destructor only
If I remember correctly you should never call destroy directly, only
free (which in tu
