Hi, On 20 March 2016 at 18:10, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > And if we didn't keep its count accurately it would eventually hit > zero and constantly have its dealloc function checked for.
I think the idea is really consistency. If we wanted to avoid all "Py_INCREF(Py_None);", it would be possible: we could let the refcount of None decrement to zero, at which point its deallocator is called; but this deallocator can simply bumps the refcount to a large value again. The deallocator would end up being called very rarely. A bientôt, Armin. _______________________________________________ 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
