On May 5, 2007, at 6:12 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > The reason for initially pursuing a recipe approach for weakref > based finalisation is that it allows time to determine whether or > not there are better recipes than whatever is proposed in the PEP > before casting it in the form of fixed language syntax. Adding > syntactic sugar for a recipe is child's play compared to trying to > get rid of syntax (or change its semantics) after discovering it is > broken in some fashion. >
if the recipe is just an interim step towards developing something that "just works", then we agree. obviously explicit finalization is preferable and relying upon cpython's "immediate" GC of non-cycled objects is a bad trap to fall into (particularly if you then run the same code using Jython for example)...but in a garbage collected language, the "loose ends" still need some way to clean themselves up even if its deferred. _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
