Re: Closing generators

From	Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Subject	Re: Closing generators
Date	2011-04-22 10:01 +0200
Organization	A newly installed InterNetNews server
Message-ID	<iorck9$26u$1@r03.glglgl.eu> (permalink)
References	<ioqkpc$qco$1@r03.glglgl.eu> <ioquei$fpj$1@dough.gmane.org> <mailman.733.1303455718.9059.python-list@python.org>

Show all headers | View raw

Am 22.04.2011 09:01, schrieb Wolfgang Rohdewald:

> On Freitag 22 April 2011, Terry Reedy wrote:

>> When returning from the function, g, if local, should
>> disappear.
>
> yes - it disappears in the sense that it no longer
> accessible, but
>
> AFAIK python makes no guarantees as for when an object
> is destroyed - CPython counts references and destroys
> when no reference is left, but that is implementation
> specific

Right - that's what I am thought about when writing the OP. But Terry is 
right - often the generator doesn't need to know that is 
closed/terminated, which is anyway possible only since 2.5.

But in these (admittedly rarely) cases, it is better practice to close 
explicitly, isn't it?

Unsure,
Thomas

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Closing generators Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2011-04-22 03:14 +0200
  Re: Closing generators Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-04-21 23:59 -0400
  Re: Closing generators Wolfgang Rohdewald <wolfgang@rohdewald.de> - 2011-04-22 09:01 +0200
    Re: Closing generators Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2011-04-22 10:01 +0200
      Re: Closing generators Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-04-22 22:15 -0400
        Re: Closing generators Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2011-04-24 05:18 +0200

csiph-web