[Python-Dev] Python 2.3a1's mandatory use of cyclic GC causes existing applications to fail

[Jonne Itkonen]

On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Guido van Rossum wrote:

> > Alternatively, to GC or not GC could be driven by
> > inheritance. I used that in my flextype implementation.
> > When a class inherits from no GC-ed anchestors only,
> > it doesn't install GC as well.
>
> That's a fine idea.  It would require that there were two standard
> base classes: object and gcobject.  Or better, object and nogcobject;
> I think that GC should still be the default for classes that have any
> instance variables at all.

Could metaclasses be used instead of inheritance? It's just that I feel
quite uncomfortable already with the `inheritance from an object', and
now if there'll be two root objects...

What would be the relationship between these two objects? Is a gcobject an
object, or are they both subclasses of an archobject?

  Jonne