does python have useless destructors?
peter at engcorp.com
Fri Jun 11 04:31:43 CEST 2004
Roger Binns wrote:
> The correct answer of course is that the object itself
> should be aware that it needs to be disposed of and that
> real world resources can leak if it isn't.
> Which brings us back in a full loop. Currently objects
> signify that they need disposing by having a destructor.
> Why not "fix" that mechanism?
Very likely the answer is "Because nobody has yet proposed
a workable solution to the several conflicting requirements".
Do _you_ have a solution? If you do and it really works,
it seems to me unlikely it would be ignored...
More information about the Python-list