On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> From the Zen of Python:
>
>> In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.
>
> I believe the reason something isn't already done to break cycles is
> that the authors of the cyclic garbage collector considered the above
> aphori
>From the Zen of Python:
> In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.
I believe the reason something isn't already done to break cycles is
that the authors of the cyclic garbage collector considered the above
aphorism. They rely on the author of the code with the cycles to
figure
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Dave Angel wrote:
> I didn't know there was a callback that a user could hook into. That's very
> interesting.
>
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Skip Montanaro wrote:
>> Whenever the GC finds a cycle that is unreferenced but uncollectable,
>> it stores those o
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> Once it's been proven that there's an unreferenced cycle, why not
>> simply dispose of one of the objects, and replace all references to it
>> (probably only one - preferably pick an obj
> Whenever the GC finds a cycle that is unreferenced but uncollectable,
> it stores those objects in the list gc.garbage. At that point, if the
> user wishes to clean up those cycles, it is up to them to delve into
> gc.garbage, untangle the objects contained within, break the cycles,
> and remove
On 04/26/2013 06:50 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
Once it's been proven that there's an unreferenced cycle, why not
simply dispose of one of the objects, and replace all references to it
(probably only one - preferably pick an object with the fewes
On 04/26/2013 06:43 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
Whenever the GC finds a cycle that is unreferenced but uncollectable,
it stores those objects in the list gc.garbage. At that point, if the
user wishes to clean up those cycles, it is up to them to delve into
gc.garbage, untangle the objects contai
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Dave Angel wrote:
> On 04/26/2013 01:57 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> And yeah. If you catch the exception inside __del__, you can cope with
>> the destructed object yourself (or LBLY, if you wish). Alternatively,
>> you just proceed as normal, and when your __del__
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Once it's been proven that there's an unreferenced cycle, why not
> simply dispose of one of the objects, and replace all references to it
> (probably only one - preferably pick an object with the fewest
> references) with a special tempora
On 04/26/2013 01:57 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Dave Angel wrote:
I don't see what your "special" temporary object actually accomplishes.
Seems to me you need to declare that your __del__() methods promise not to
reference each other, and the gc would then check a
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Dave Angel wrote:
> I don't see what your "special" temporary object actually accomplishes.
> Seems to me you need to declare that your __del__() methods promise not to
> reference each other, and the gc would then check all objects in the cycle,
> and do its prese
On 04/26/2013 12:54 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
[[ Resending under a more appropriate subject line... sorry about
that, ignore the other one as it'll only confuse matters ]]
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:54 AM, MRAB wrote:
On 26/04/2013 14:02, anatoly techtonik wrote:
This circular reference proble
[[ Resending under a more appropriate subject line... sorry about
that, ignore the other one as it'll only confuse matters ]]
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:54 AM, MRAB wrote:
> On 26/04/2013 14:02, anatoly techtonik wrote:
>> This circular reference problem is interesting. In object space it
>> proba
13 matches
Mail list logo
