Heiko Wundram wrote: > As was said before: as long as you keep a reference to an object, the object's > storage _will not be_ reused by Python for any other objects (which is > sensible, or would you like your object to be overwritten by other objects > before you're done with them?). Besides, even if Python did free the memory > that was used, the operating system wouldn't pick it up (in the general case) > anyway (because of fragmentation issues), so Python keeping the memory in an > internal free-list for new objects is a sensible choice the Python developers > took here.
This isn't true. Just tried with python 2.5a2 and: d:\python25\python.exe >>> a = range(1000 * 100 *100) # 173 MB >>> del a # 122MB So now, like you saied, if I try to allocate another memory chunk, python'll re-use it... But this isn't true: >>> b = range(100 * 100 * 100) # 126 MB >>> del b # 122MB >>> exit() # :) d:\python25\python.exe >>> b = range(100 * 100 * 100) # 19 MB Do why python don't reuse the freed memory and re-allocate 4 MB (126 - 122)? For me it's a problem... > --- Heiko. Bye, Michele -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
