Michael, >> So, only the reference count gets lowered. Yep, thats daft. > > Why? Consider:
You missed the point. It was-and-is not about decrementing a reference but still having it above zero, but what happens when the reference becomes zero: is the __del__ method called directly (as I find logical), or is it only called when the garbage collector actually removes the instance from memory (which Chris thinks what happens) ? > No, that is exactly what happens. No, it doesn't. As a simple bit of testcode has shown me (read my reply to Chris). > Be careful who you call stupid. Seriously. Who did I call stupid ? I mentioned that the language doing it as Chris thinks it happens would be stupid, and I gave a reason for that (race conditions everywhere). But odd: Neither him nor you nor anyone else who complains about me thinking for myself has even /tried/ to shoot holes in my example (or explain, let alone underbuild their own stance). Do you have /any/ idea to what that makes me think ? Yeah, exactly that. :-(( > Doesn't reflect well on you, who by your own admission is still learning > the language. True, I'm a newbie learning /Python/. But it is far from the first language I've used. Experience /does/ count for something you know. :-) > And that's exactly what Chris and others did. They explained the facts No, they didn't. They just TOLD me /their/ "facts". Not an explanation anywhere. :-( Regards, Rudy Wieser -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
