Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #3852
| Path | csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!87.79.20.105.MISMATCH!news.netcologne.de!ramfeed1.netcologne.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Subject | Re: Closing generators |
| Date | Fri, 22 Apr 2011 10:01:13 +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> |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| User-Agent | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110221 SUSE/3.1.8 Thunderbird/3.1.8 |
| In-Reply-To | <mailman.733.1303455718.9059.python-list@python.org> |
| Lines | 25 |
| NNTP-Posting-Date | 22 Apr 2011 10:10:03 CEST |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 79814b0a.newsspool2.arcor-online.net |
| X-Trace | DXC==oOH^T>XKMnf1oJaJ0@dmgA9EHlD;3Ycb4Fo<]lROoRa8kF<OcfhCOkBmb_WZB[aaiK8FCa6^2FWbOLF_]FfFg8o`mR9ImdNUQe |
| X-Complaints-To | usenet-abuse@arcor.de |
| Xref | x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:3852 |
Show key headers only | 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
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