On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 15:03, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > Dear python-dev, > > The Python implementation of IOBase, the base class for everything IO, has the > (strange) idea to define a __del__ method. It is probably meant to avoid code > duplication, so that users subclassing IOBase automatically get the > close-on-destruct behaviour. > > (there is an even stranger test in test_io which involves overriding the > __del__ > method in a class derived from FileIO...) > > However, it has the drawback that all IO objects inherit a __del__ method, > meaning problems when collecting reference cycles (the __del__ may not get > called if caught in a reference cycle, defeating the whole point). > > While rewriting the IO stack in C, we have tried to keep this behaviour, but > it > seems better to just do it in the tp_dealloc function, and kill the __del__ > (actually, we *already* do it in tp_dealloc, because __del__ / tp_del > behaviour > for C types is shady). Subclassing IOBase in Python would keep the tp_dealloc > and therefore the close-on-destruct behaviour, without the problems of a > __del__ > method. > > (the implementation has to take a few precautions, first revive the object, > then > check its "closed" attribute/property - ignoring errors -, and if "closed" > ended > False then call the close() method) > > What do you think?
Fine by me. People should be using the context manager for guaranteed file closure anyway IMO. -Brett _______________________________________________ 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
