I perhaps didn't understand the PEP completely but I think that the goal of marking some objects as immortal is to remove the refcount from they.
For immutable objects that would make them truly immutable. However I don't think that the immortality could be applied to any immutable object by default. Think in the immutable strings (str). What would happen with a program that does heavy parsing? I imagine that it will generate thousands of little strings. If those are immortal, the program will fill its memory very quickly as the GC will not reclaim their memory. The same could happen with any frozenfoo object. Leaving immortality to only a few objects, like True and None makes more sense as they are few (bound if you want). On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 09:16:00PM +0100, Marco Sulla wrote:
As title. dict can't be an immortal object, but hashable frozendict and frozenmap can. I think this can increase their usefulness. Another advantage: frozen dataclass will be really immutable if they could use a frozen(dict|map) instead of a dict as __dict__ -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
-- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
