On Friday 08 November 2002 01:59 am, Fredrik Juhlin wrote: > On Fri, 2002-11-08 at 10:34, Greg Fortune wrote: > > On Friday 08 November 2002 12:44 am, you wrote: > > > The reason you're having problems is most likely because there is no > > > such thing as a destructor in Python. I assume that you, like many > > > before you, are treating the __del__() method as a destructor but the > > > reality is there is no guarantee that __del__() will be called on > > > program exit. The Python Language Reference recommends that you only > > > use > > > > ???? ack, where did you find information implying that __del__ might not > > get called on program exit? From my understanding, __del__ just wouldn't > > be called until the reference count reaches 0 and the garbage collection > > cycle executes. That, of course, should happen for every object at > > program exit... If it doesn't, that would seem like a Python bug. > > I got it from the Python Language Reference (a convenient link was > included in my last mail and below). To quote: > "It is not guaranteed that __del__() methods are called for objects that > still exist when the interpreter exits." > Wether or not it is a bug I'm really not qualified to say.
Looks like I skimmed right over that to the Warning section and figured that's what you were talking about. I see it now and feel just a tad silly ;o) If it's a bug, it's a documented one... > > > > __del__() methods to "do the absolute minimum needed to maintain > > > external invariants". See > > > http://www.python.org/doc/current/ref/customization.html for more > > > information. > > //Fredrik > > _______________________________________________ > PyKDE mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde _______________________________________________ PyKDE mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mats.gmd.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
