> so what about > > del x Ups. I never used it for an object. So far I only used it for deletion of elements of a container. In that case del has two purposes:
1. Deletes an item from a container (and of course destructs it) --> list.remove(elem) 2. Calls the destructor of an object --> list.destruct() One statement and two distinct purposes. Why not having two "standard" function (for containers we have a remove-function) and all objects have a destruct-function. Still no need for a del keyword. A del keyword that calls the destructor... well that is okay (it could be handled without). I am used to see the del keyword in opposition to the new keyword (which does not exist/is implicit in Python). The del keyword for removing an element in a container is a bit awkward to me. I am not as knowledgeable about languages as you are and I am hoping people like you can enlighten me about the language decision taken. > for the curious, guido's rationale for len() can be found here: > > http://preview.tinyurl.com/y6vavp Thanks for the hint. Marco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
