STINNER Victor <vstin...@redhat.com> added the comment:
> Tracking objects that do not need this will just add work to the garbage > collector. Not all instances of trackable types should be tracked, for > example the empty tuple and some dicts are not tracked. Well, in that case, we should do the opposite of PR 8505, what I proposed there: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/8505#issuecomment-480763122 "Either GC support must be removed (remove Py_TPFLAGS_HAVE_GC, remove tp_clear and tp_traverse, etc.), or the implementation should be fixed (call PyObject_GC_Track)." => fully remove the GC support I don't see the point of implementing tp_traverse if it's not called. I'm not sure if tp_clear is related to the GC or not. Maybe keep it :-) ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue18372> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
