On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 11:46 PM R.Wieser <address@not.available> wrote: > > Chris, > > > Well, that's exactly what happens. > > So, only the reference count gets lowered. Yep, thats daft. > > ... unless you explain why it can only be done that way.
Okay. What should happen when you do this? x = 5 del x Should the integer 5 be deleted? > > Also, when you scorn something without knowing your facts, > > you tend to make yourself look like a fool :) > > I tend to go with logic. No logic => it most likely doesn't work that way. > > Choosing to go with a delayed action like you say will, as I already > explained, create problems later on (race conditions everywhere). And as I > do not think the designers of the language where that stupid I must > therefore reject your claim to what you think happens. > > But, as you mentioned, I do not know (all) the facts. Please do present > them. Maybe there is a logic in there I do not yet see. > > > Check out the 'with' statement. > > I'm sorry, but nope. > > Rule one: When debugging do *not* throw more stuff at a problem than what is > neccessary to make it show its ugly head. > Rule two: When in doubt, see rule One. :-) So the language designers couldn't possibly have been so stupid as to do things this way, but you're going to ignore what they did? Cool. Bye! ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
