Circular references (was: Defining VCL-like framework for Py

[Gordon McMillan]

William Tanksley's a glutton for punishment <wink>:
[me]
> >I said "deterministic", not "easily predicted" <wink>.
> 
> Both are deterministic, neither one is easily predicted.  And you
> said "nondeterminant", not "deterministic".  I do not think that
> word means what you think it means ;-).

There are about 6 entries under determinant, one of which is close 
enough to a synonym for deterministic that I can claim moral outrage, 
scream epithets and foam at the mouth while the crowd screams "rip 
his arms off" <snarl/wink/roar>.

But ref counting depends only on what goes on inside my process. GC
is influenced by other things.

But why stop there? Note that Godel's theorem is dependent only on a 
_model_ of the integers - not an actual implementation. The fact that 
a finite group is a better description of the (computer) 
implementation is immaterial.

Also chaos theory just requires a universe big enough (and warm 
enough) for things to bump into each other.

> >In some languages, circular references make it hard to compile, let 
> >alone clean up nicely.
> 
> You're kidding!  How does that work?

Try writing 2 C++ classes that reference each other without using 
any pointers. If you can get it to compile, the static initializers 
will kill you.

if-there's-anything-left-when-I-get-through-with-you-<wink>-ly y'rs

- Gordon