A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-February/033152.html below:

[Python-Dev] Python 2.3a1's mandatory use of cyclic GC causes existing applications to fail

[Python-Dev] Python 2.3a1's mandatory use of cyclic GC causes existing applications to fail [Python-Dev] Python 2.3a1's mandatory use of cyclic GC causes existing applications to failJonne Itkonen ji@mit.jyu.fi
Fri, 7 Feb 2003 09:27:34 +0200 (EET)
On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Guido van Rossum wrote:

> > Alternatively, to GC or not GC could be driven by
> > inheritance. I used that in my flextype implementation.
> > When a class inherits from no GC-ed anchestors only,
> > it doesn't install GC as well.
>
> That's a fine idea.  It would require that there were two standard
> base classes: object and gcobject.  Or better, object and nogcobject;
> I think that GC should still be the default for classes that have any
> instance variables at all.

Could metaclasses be used instead of inheritance? It's just that I feel
quite uncomfortable already with the `inheritance from an object', and
now if there'll be two root objects...

What would be the relationship between these two objects? Is a gcobject an
object, or are they both subclasses of an archobject?

  Jonne




RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4