MRAB wrote: If I want to cache some objects, I put them in a dict, using the id as > the key. If I wanted to locate an object in a cache and didn't have > id(), I'd have to do a linear search for it. That sounds dangerous. An id() is only valid as long as the object it came from still exists, after which it can get re-used for a different object. So when an object is flushed from your cache, you would have to chase down all the places its id is being stored and eliminate them. Are you sure you couldn't achieve the same thing more safely using weak references? -- Greg
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