garbage collection / cyclic references
andrew at acooke.org
Sat Mar 21 15:53:59 CET 2009
andrew cooke wrote:
> Aaron Brady wrote:
>> On Mar 21, 7:54 am, "andrew cooke" <and... at acooke.org> wrote:
>>> they should not be used to do things like flushing and closing
>>> files, for example.
>> What is your basis for this claim, if it's not the mere unreliability
>> of finalization? IOW, are you not merely begging the question?
> I'm not sure it's clear, but I was talking about Java.
crap. i meant to say INdeterministic.
sorry, i am in a foul mood (for completely unrelated reasons) and probably
shouldn't be making posts to a public newsgroup.
> As Paul implied, a consequence of completely automated garbage management
> is that it is (from a programmer's POV) deterministic. So it's a
> programming error to rely on the finalizer to free resources that don't
> follow that model (ie any resource that's anything other that reasonable
> amounts of memory).
> That's pretty much an unavoidable consequence of fully automated garbage
> collection. You can pretend it's not, and try using finalizers for other
> work if you want. That's fine - it's your code, not mine. I'm just
> explaining how life is.
More information about the Python-list