Kristján Valur Jónsson <krist...@ccpgames.com> added the comment:
Hi Daniel.
Your message was classified as spam, I have no idea why, but this is why I only
noticed it now.
Your suggestion is interesting, I hadn't thought of that. Yes, it is possible
to use the track/untrack functions (I think), but that would mean that you
would have to monitor your object for every state change and reliably detect
the transition from one state to another. Being able to query the current
state and let gc know: "No, I cannot be collected as I am now" is a much more
robust solution from the programmers perspective.
A further difference is this: If an object isn't tracked, it won't be
collected if it is part of a cycle, but it will not be put in gc.garbage
either. In effect, it will just remain in memory, unreachable, with no chance
of it ever being released.
In contrast, a generator (or in my case, a tasklet) that needs to have a
finalizer run when it goes away, will end up in gc.garbage, which a dilligent
application will visit once in a while in order to clean it out. I'm not sure
how you would clear out a generator like that, but in Stackless python, you
could do something like this once in a while:
for g in gc.garbage:
if isinstance(g, stackless.tasklet):
g.kill()
del gc.garbage[:]
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue9141>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
