On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 12:53:49 -0400, Douglas Alan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> "Python" doesn't *have* any refcounting semantics. > > I'm not convinced that Python has *any* semantics at all outside of > specific implementations. It has never been standardized to the rigor > of your typical barely-readable language standards document. > >> If you rely on the behavior of CPython's memory allocation and >> garbage collection you run the risk of producing programs that won't >> port tp Jython, or IronPython, or PyPy, or ... > >> This is a trade-off that many users *are* willing to make. > > Yes, I have no interest at the moment in trying to make my code > portable between every possible implementation of Python, since I have > no idea what features such implementations may or may not support. > When I code in Python, I'm coding for CPython. In the future, I may > do some stuff in Jython, but I wouldn't call it "Python" -- it'd call > it "Jython".
Yeah, especially since Jython is currently (according to the Wikipedia article) an implementation of Python 2.2 ... not even *I* use versions that are that old these days! [I have, for a long time, been meaning to post here about refcounting and relying on CPython's __del__ semantics, but I've never had the energy to write clearly or handle the inevitable flame war. So I'll just note that my view on this seems similar to Doug's.] /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu \X/ snipabacken.dyndns.org> R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
