[M.-A. Lemburg, on the resurrection/multiple-__del__ "idiom"]
> ...
> The idea came from a different area: the C implementation
> of Python uses free lists a lot and these are basically
> implementations of the same idiom: save an allocated
> resource for reviving it at some later point.
Excellent analogy! Thanks. Now that you phrased it in this clarifying way,
I recall that very much the same point was raised in the papers that
resulted in the creation of guardians in Scheme. I don't know that anyone
is actually using Python __del__ this way today (I am not), but you reminded
me why I thought it was natural at one time <wink>.
generally-__del__-aversive-now-except-in-c++-where-destructors-are-
guaranteed-to-be-called-when-you-except-them-to-be-ly y'rs - tim
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