Aahz wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Carl Banks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Feb 24, 7:03 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) wrote: >>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >>> Jeff Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> (3) Garbage collection is at least as desirable a language feature as >>>> deterministic destruction. >>> Enh. There probably are some people who claim that, but I can't think >>> of any off-hand. >> I am most certainly claiming it; in fact I'm claiming that GC far more >> desirable, because the cost of deterministic destruction is too high. > > I'm trimming the rest of your post because I don't have time to argue > with you, but I want to point out that you're making the same mistake > that Jeff is: garbage collection and deterministic destruction are not > the only techniques for managing memory and resources. In particular, > CPython primarily relies on reference counting
That is GC. It's just not mark & sweep. >, which has similarities > with *both* GC and deterministic destruction. > > Now you know why I said that I don't know anybody who makes Jeff's > claim. ;-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
