Marco Paolini added the comment: Asking the user to manage strong refs is just passing the potential leak issue outside of the standard library. It doesn't really solve anything.
If the user gets the strong refs wrong he can either lose tasks or leak memory. If the standard library gets it right, both issues are avoided. > I'm all in favor of documenting that you must keep a strong reference to a > task that you want to keep alive. I'm not keen on automatically keep all > tasks alive, that might exacerbate leaks (which are by definition hard to find) in existing programs. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue21163> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
