threading support in python

km srikrishnamohan at gmail.com
Fri Sep 8 18:58:24 CEST 2006


Where is Guido ? would be great to hear  his opinion on GIL/ GC issues in
future versions of Python.

regards,
KM

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 7 Sep 2006 08:02:57 GMT, Antoon Pardon <apardon at forel.vub.ac.be> wrote:
>
> On 2006-09-06, sjdevnull at yahoo.com <sjdevnull at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Paul Rubin wrote:
> >> "sjdevnull at yahoo.com" <sjdevnull at yahoo.com> writes:
> >> > (1) I think is here to stay, if you're going to tell programmers that
> >> > their destructors can't make program-visible changes (e.g. closing
> the
> >> > database connection when a dbconn is destroyed), that's a _huge_
> change
> >> > from current practice that needs serious debate.
> >>
> >> We had that debate already (PEP 343).  Yes, there is some sloppy
> >> current practice by CPython users that relies on the GC to close the
> >> db conn.
> >
> > This point is unrelated to with or ref-counting.  Even the standard
> > library will close file objects when they are GC'd.
>
> This is not totally true. My experience is that if you use the
> tarfile module any tarfile that was opened for appending or
> writing risks being corrupted if it isn't closed explicedly.
>
> --
> Antoon Pardon
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20060908/21ab3b18/attachment.html>


More information about the Python-list mailing list