On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 5:51 AM Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> wrote:
> Serhiy Storchaka schrieb am 11.04.19 um 17:30: > > If reducing the Python memory footprint is an argument for disabling > > Py_TRACE_REFS, it is a weak argument because there is larger overhead in > > the debug build. > > I think what Victor is argueing is rather that we have better ways to debug > memory problems these days, so we might be able to get rid of a relict that > no-one is using (or should be using) anymore and that has its drawbacks > (such as a very different ABI and higher memory load). > > I don't really have an opinion here, but I can at least say that I never > found a use case for Py_TRACE_REFS myself and therefore certainly wouldn't > miss it. > I have a feeling that at some point someone might want to use this to debug some leak (presumably caused by C code) beyond what gc.get_objects() can report. But I agree that it isn't useful to the vast majority of users of a regular debug build. So let's leave it off by default even in debug builds. But let's not delete the macros. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him/his **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
