At 11:12 AM 5/31/2005 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote: >uncertainty of the possibility to call close() from the >destructor may have slowed that down.
If you're talking about the bit about __del__ not working when hanging off a cycle, my apologies for creating that confusion, I misunderstood Tim's post. If you're talking about the circular reference scenario involving exceptions, then I think I've already given a tentative explanation why such a cycle will not include the generator-iterator itself (only its frame) as long as the generator-iterator clears its frame's f_back when the frame is not in use. It would probably be a good idea to verify this, but I think the basic idea is sound. The only scenario in which a generator-iterator would be uncollectable is if you took some action outside the iterator to pass it into itself, or if you stored the iterator in a global variable. However, even in the latter case, the phase of Python shutdown that clears module contents would break the cycle and cause the generator to finalize, albeit a bit late and perhaps in a broken way. Still, storage of generator-iterators in module globals is a very unlikely scenario, since it's more common to loop over such iterators than it is to store them in any kind of variable. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
