Fredrik Lundh wrote: > André Roberge wrote: >>If I need to have the user call Evil.destroy() as Evil >>is getting out of scope, it would miss the whole point >>of teaching about the natural way scope and namespace >>work. > > > well, if you insist on using finalizers to keep track of what's in the current > scope, I'd say that you are missing the point about how scopes and name- > spaces work... > I don't think I do, but I think I didn't explain things well enough. 1. The user creates an object, within a "local" scope. When he does that, I update a list of images in a "global" scope. I then use that list of images to decide what to display on the screen.
The user is unaware of the connection I am making behind the scene. > [Snip] > > the correct solution is to inspect the current namespace every time you > refresh the screen, and make sure the screen contents matches what's > in the namespace. To do that, I would need to put a "link", in the "global" scope between the object created by the user, and the user. However, in doing so (if I am not missing the point about how scopes and namespaces work...) the object created by the user would always have a reference in the global scope ... and thus would never disappear from the namespace. I understand that, if the "link" is a "weak reference", then it might disappear when the object goes out of scope. Is that what you mean I should do? André > </F> -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
