Right, as long as by "zero names" you're ruling out any pointers to pointers through a data structure, ...

Are you referring to this situation: IDLE 1.2.1

...

...

import sys a = 'this is a really unique value' sys.getrefcount(a) 2 dict01 = { 'first' : a, 'second' : 2 } sys.getrefcount(a) 3 dict02 = { 'uno' : a, 'dos' : 222 } sys.getrefcount(a) 4

... which are anonymous from another angle (the structure itself has a name, but the objects may be like Rod(color="Red"), with color choosing the length behind the scenes. d = {"red":Rod()} is then a string literal mapped to an object, *like* a top-level name, but not. d is the top-level name in this namespace. Rod( ) in a sense has no name, is a call to a constructor that returned on object captured within a dictionary. So it won't be garbage collected, as it knows there's this pointer for some reason (for what reason the object will have no clue).

"Rod() in a sense has no name" ?? Doesn't the Rod object get the name "red" in *almost exactly* the same way in these two cases? Case #1: >>> red = Rod() Case #2: >>> d = { "red" : Rod() } In Case #1, the name "red" is created in the local (or maybe global) namespace. In Case #2, the name "red" is created in the namespace of a dictionary object. In the sticky-note metaphor: a dictionary object is just a collection of sticky-notes -John Posner