In <jqqt5s$ejd$1...@speranza.aioe.org> "Steve" <n...@spam.com> writes:
> gc: objects in each generation: 453 258 4553
> gc: collectable <ConfigParser 026C0050>
> gc: collectable <dict 0264DE40>
> gc: collectable <OrderedDict 0200FB78>
> gc: collectable <_Link 02713300>
> gc: collectable <dict 0264D930>
> gc: collectable <weakproxy 026BC180>
> gc: collectable <OrderedDict 0200FC10>
> gc: collectable <_Link 02713350>
> gc: collectable <dict 0264D9C0>
> gc: collectable <weakproxy 026BC1B0>
> gc: collectable <OrderedDict 0200FCA8>
> gc: collectable <_Link 02713378>
> gc: collectable <dict 0264DC90>
> gc: collectable <weakproxy 026BC210>
> gc: collectable <SectionProxy 026C0030>
> gc: collectable <dict 0264D5D0>
> gc: collectable <_Link 02713328>
> gc: collectable <dict 0269D8A0>
> gc: collectable <weakproxy 026BC150>
> gc: done, 19 unreachable, 0 uncollectable, 0.0000s elapsed.
> The leaks can be removed by uncommenting both lines shown.
> This strikes me as very odd behaviour. Can anyone explain it, or is it a
> bug?
I'm unfamiliar with gc output, but just glancing over it I don't see
anything that looks like a leak. It reported that there were 19 objects
which are unreachable and therefore are candidates for being collected.
What makes you think there is a leak?
--
John Gordon A is for Amy, who fell down the stairs
gor...@panix.com B is for Basil, assaulted by bears
-- Edward Gorey, "The Gashlycrumb Tinies"
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
