Hi all,
What is the basic difference between Free and FreeAndNil?
Is FreeAndNil = Free + Nil?
When should i use Free and when should i use FreeAndNil?
I am not getting these when goggling can someone help me.
Thanks in advance.
Hi all,
What is the basic difference between Free and FreeAndNil?
Is FreeAndNil = Free + Nil?
When should i use Free and when should i use FreeAndNil?
I am not getting these when goggling can someone help me.
Thanks in advance.
See
And have a look at the implementation:
procedure FreeAndNil(var Obj);
var
Temp: TObject;
begin
Temp := TObject(Obj);
Pointer(Obj) := nil;
Temp.Free;
end;
Consider the following code:
procedure TForm1.FormCreate(Sender: TObject);
var
bm: TBitmap;
begin
bm := TBitmap.Create;
bm.LoadFromFile('C:\Users\Andreas Rejbrand\Documents\RAD Studio\6.0\Demos\DelphiWin32\VCLWin32\Football\up.bmp');
bm.Free;
if Assigned(bm) then
bm.SaveToFile('C:\Users\Andreas Rejbrand\Desktop\test.bmp')
else
ShowMessage('Cannot save! The bitmap does no longer exist!');
end;
This will create an error or an invalid (empty) bitmap on my desktop, because I try to use an object that has been freed. Yes, even though bm
has been freed, it is still "assigned", i.e. bm
still points to a memory adress, even though there is nothing (usable) there. To overcome this, one can set bm := nil
, as a safeguard, Then assigned(bm)
will return false, as one would want. More or less, FreeAndNil(bm)
is a shorthand for bm.Free; bm := nil
. The first statement frees all memory (and OS resources, CPU time etc. used by the object), and bm := nil
sets the "pointer" bm
to nil
, so that bm
no longer points to the place where the object used to be, but no longer is. This way you (and routines like assigned
) will not get fooled to believe that there still is a bitmap object.
Some say that you should always use FreeAndNil(foo)
rather than foo.Free
. Well, why not? The additional instruction foo := nil
will probably not take too many nanoseconds to execute, and indeed assigned(foo) = false
is a very nice property of a freed object. But then again, if you know what you are doing, and know that you will never use the foo
object again after freeing it, then you could stick to just foo.free
. Really, some would argue that in many cases (but not all), trying to use a variable of a freed object is a bug by itself. (Of course there are cases where you do this intentionally - you have an object foo
that sometimes is assigned and sometimes is not.)
@Bharat, the difference between Free
and FreeAndNil
is that in addition to free memory used by an object FreeAndNil
sets the object reference to nil.
you can check theses links for discussions about use Free or FreeAndNil
Basically, FreeAndNil frees the object and then sets the reference to nil. This marks it as unassigned. So the only reason you would need to use FreeAndNil is if your code is going to reuse the reference. If you're in a destructor or a finally block, freeing objects that you're never going to touch again, just use Free.
See Delphi Memory Management Made Simple for an example of when I did find it useful. Mghie's comment at the bottom is also worth reading.
Short answer: use FreeAndNil, why not?
Long answer: see other replies and links.
I'll answer in a different way.
Maybe, filling your object reference with nil
after freeing your object is not always a good idea.
That way, you do not have a distinction between a reference that was never used (and hence is nil
), and a reference that has been used, but should not be used in the future.
So, filling it with a magic number (similar to what the FastMM memory manager can do with the content of blocks of memory when those blocks are freed).
--jeroen