Am 23.04.2011 04:15, schrieb Terry Reedy:
.close() methods that release operating system resources are needed
*because* there is no guarantee of immediate garbage collection. They
were not needed when CPython was the only Python. The with statement was
added partly to make it easier to make sure
On 4/22/2011 4:01 AM, Thomas Rachel wrote:
Am 22.04.2011 09:01, schrieb Wolfgang Rohdewald:
On Freitag 22 April 2011, Terry Reedy wrote:
When returning from the function, g, if local, should
disappear.
yes - it disappears in the sense that it no longer
accessible, but
AFAIK python makes n
Am 22.04.2011 09:01, schrieb Wolfgang Rohdewald:
On Freitag 22 April 2011, Terry Reedy wrote:
When returning from the function, g, if local, should
disappear.
yes - it disappears in the sense that it no longer
accessible, but
AFAIK python makes no guarantees as for when an object
is destro
On Freitag 22 April 2011, Terry Reedy wrote:
> > for i in g:
> > if i is not None:
> > g.close()
> > return i
>
> When returning from the function, g, if local, should
> disappear.
yes - it disappears in the sense that it no longer
accessible, but
AFAIK python makes no guarantees as for when an
On 4/21/2011 9:14 PM, Thomas Rachel wrote:
Hi folks,
it is possible to close a generator. That is (among others) for the
following case:
I run a for loop over the iterator, but then I break it. Now I can leave
the generator to the GC (which is AFAI have been told a thing which I
should not do),
Hi folks,
it is possible to close a generator. That is (among others) for the
following case:
I run a for loop over the iterator, but then I break it. Now I can leave
the generator to the GC (which is AFAI have been told a thing which I
should not do), or I can clean up myself.
Example:
f
