[issue40047] itertools.tee does not release resources during iteration?
New submission from Peter Würtz : Itertools `tee` does not seem to de-reference yielded items, even after consumption of all items from all tee-iterators. According to the documentation (to my understanding), there shouldn't be any extra memory requirement as long as the tee-iterators are consumed in a balanced way. I.e. after an item was pulled from all iterators there shouldn't be any residual reference to it. This is true for the example-implementation mentioned in the documentation, but `itertools.tee` doesn't de-reference items until the tee-iterator itself is deleted: https://pastebin.com/r3JUkH41 Is this a bug or am I missing something? -- components: Library (Lib) messages: 364849 nosy: pwuertz priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: itertools.tee does not release resources during iteration? type: resource usage versions: Python 3.7 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue40047> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue16239] PEP8 arithmetic operator examples
Peter Würtz added the comment: x * 2 - 1 is less clear than x*2 - 1 I don't feel this. Anyone else feel this? I strongly feel so. And if you don't take my word for it, just open any math book or look at any formula and recognize that it is the general consensus that the elements of a product are written close together whereas the spacing between two summands is considerably larger. Typically, the dots between products are omitted to reduce the spacing even further. Trying to educate people to do otherwise is just weird, isn't it? It seems to me, this is a serious change in the Style Guide. Actually it isn't. Even the current style guide says that there should be an increased amount of spacing around operators of low(est) priority. The serious change happened when the old rule always use exactly one space around all arithmetic operators fell, which certainly was a good call. I've seen arguments on mailing lists whether to use x ** 2 + 1 instead of x**2 + 1 based on that rule. I hardly doubt that anyone prefers x ** 2 + 1 over x**2 + 1, so neither should the style guide. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue16239 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue16239] PEP8 arithmetic operator examples
New submission from Peter Würtz: I think the PEP8 examples for arithmetic expressions are a bit misleading. (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#id20) The text clearly says that it should add spaces around operators of low(est) priority, which means that I'm encouraged to visually group an expression of high priority. It doesn't say (anymore?) that there should always be spaces around all arithmetic operators. This is however not reflected in the examples. In the examples x = x*2 - 1 is listed as a negative example, while being perfectly compliant with the guide. Shouldn't this be in the Yes or an Optionally example block? I believe these examples may cause some people to interpret the style guide in a very rigid way, eventually leading to PEP8 formatting tools that flatten out nicely grouped expressions. -- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 172965 nosy: docs@python, pwuertz priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: PEP8 arithmetic operator examples type: enhancement ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue16239 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
