RetroSearch Browse

Fri Sep 24 23:22:15 CEST 2010 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-September/104059.html

On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 4:09 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de>wrote:

> I think it would be possible to have two versions of
> _PyGC_REFS_UNTRACKED, one being, say, -5.
> _PyGC_REFS_UNTRACKED_AND_KEEP_IT_THAT_WAY would be what you get
> when you call PyObject_GC_UnTrack; the code to do automatic
> tracking/untracking based on contents would use some other
> new API (which would be non-public in 2.7.x).
>

Where would the extra state information be stored? (to distinguish untracked
and untracked-and-keep-it-that-way)

-- 
Daniel Stutzbach, Ph.D.
President, Stutzbach Enterprises, LLC <http://stutzbachenterprises.com/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20100924/05ec2224/attachment.html>

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-September/104059.html below:

[Python-Dev] PyObject_GC_UnTrack() no longer reliable in 2.7?