Hello!

I've recently switched from Delphi to FP and never been exposed to TP-style objects before.

At first sight they seem very similar to Delphi-style classes. However, it seems it is possible to allocate them on the stack - very convenient.

Is it right to assume they are automatically deallocated when they go out of scope (e.g. no need to free them manually)?

Is it right to assume they are automatically deallocated when they go out of scope (e.g. no need to free them manually)?

The space of the object is cleaned. However if the object uses dyn memory, you will have to call the destructor (destroy) to make the object cleanup.

In general it is considered a good custom to destroy them.

I think in theory it's possible for the compiler to automatically call the destructor always when leaving the function (think implicit exception handlers here), but I guess not so many people are using them anymore in new code that it would be worth it. Would need a new keyword or something too, as it's not backward-compatible obviously.

Micha

Marco van de Voort wrote

The space of the object is cleaned. However if the object uses dyn memory, you will have to call the destructor (destroy) to make the object cleanup. In general it is considered a good custom to destroy them.

So no C++-style automatic deallocation (the destructor is called automatically) is done?

If not, do neither classes nor objects provide such functionality?

No. Note that most local objects in C++ are strings and the like, but strings and dynamic arrays are already first tier datatypes in FPC and automatically managed.

If not, do neither classes nor objects provide such functionality?

No. For classes it doesn't make sense anyway, since in the code a reference could be passed to a different structure.