On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Brian Quinlan <brian at sweetapp.com> wrote: > > On Dec 11, 2010, at 6:33 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > >> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Brian Quinlan <brian at sweetapp.com> wrote: >>> >>> Is it still unclear why it is there? Maybe you could propose some >>> additional >>> documentation. >> >> Did you get my question the other day as to whether a >> weakref.WeakKeySet might be a better choice? I believe you would be >> able to get rid of the periodic sweep for dead references if you did >> that, and I didn't spot any obvious downsides. > > No I didn't, sorry! Could you resent it if it has more details then the > paragraph above? There wasn't much more detail, as there actually isn't a great deal to the idea. This was the main comment in the previous email: "It seems to me that using WeakSet would mean you could get rid of _remove_dead_thread_references altogether (the implicit callbacks would handle that part), and then a set() call in _python_exit would give you concrete references to work with for cleanup purposes." Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
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