Neil Schemenauer wrote:
>
> I didn't submit the patch to SF yet because I am thinking of redesigning
> the gc module API. I really don't like the current bitmask interface
> for setting options.
Why? There's nothing wrong with it.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas on a good interface for setting various GC
> options? There may be many options and they may change with the
> evolution of the collector. My current idea is to use something like:
>
> gc.get_option(<name>)
>
> gc.set_option(<name>, <value>, ...)
>
> with the module defining constants for options. For example:
>
> gc.set_option(gc.DEBUG_LEAK, 1)
>
> would enable leak debugging. Does this look okay? Should I try to get
> it done for 2.0?
This is too much. Don't worry, it's perfect as is.
Also, I support the idea of exporting the collected garbage for
debugging -- haven't looked at the patch though. Is it possible
to collect it subsequently?
--
Vladimir MARANGOZOV | Vladimir.Marangozov@inrialpes.fr
http://sirac.inrialpes.fr/~marangoz | tel:(+33-4)76615277 fax:76615252
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