does python have useless destructors?

Carl Banks imbosol at aerojockey.invalid
Mon Jun 14 23:02:02 CEST 2004


David Turner wrote:
> 
> 
> Carl Banks <imbosol at aerojockey.invalid> wrote in message news:<g31zc.89734$DG4.42241 at fe2.columbus.rr.com>...
>> [snip]
>> > I don't need to know whether my function is the sole user of an object
>> > and it falls to me to free it when I'm done, because the system takes
>> > care of that.  I get it, I use it, I forget about it. 
>> 
>> The problem is, you can't always afford to forget about it.  Sometimes
>> you have to make sure that at this point in the program, this resource
>> has been released.
>> 
>> If you're relying on garbage collection to do that for you, you're
>> asking for trouble.
> 
> 
> Carl, this is why we're suggesting a mechanism other than garbage
> collection to deal with this.
[snip]

Replace "garbage collection" with "automatic finalization" and
everything I just said is just as true.


> This is exactly how CPython works at the moment, bar one exceptional
> case which needs to be fixed.

What case is that?


-- 
CARL BANKS                      http://www.aerojockey.com/software
"If you believe in yourself, drink your school, stay on drugs, and
don't do milk, you can get work." 
          -- Parody of Mr. T from a Robert Smigel Cartoon



More information about the Python-list mailing list