Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!nerim.net!novso.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed2.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path: <random832@fastmail.us>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.019
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.96; '*S*': 0.00; 'tree': 0.05; 'callback': 0.09; 'chairs': 0.09; 'received:internal': 0.09; '24,': 0.16; 'help?': 0.16; 'message-id:@webmail.messagingengine.com': 0.16; 'objects.': 0.16; 'owner.': 0.16; 'received:10.202': 0.16; 'received:10.202.2': 0.16; 'received:10.202.2.212': 0.16; 'received:66.111': 0.16; 'received:66.111.4': 0.16; 'received:messagingengine.com': 0.16; 'fix': 0.17; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'feb': 0.22; 'refers': 0.24; "shouldn't": 0.24; 'tend': 0.24; 'suggested': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'code': 0.31; 'everywhere': 0.31; 'object.': 0.31; 'this.': 0.32; 'received:66': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'object,': 0.36; 'method': 0.36; 'received:10': 0.37; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'does': 0.39; 'structure': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'chain': 0.60; 'removing': 0.60; 'from:no real name:2**0': 0.61; "you're": 0.61; 'header:Message-Id:1': 0.63; 'name': 0.63; 'subject:Design': 0.78; 'avoids': 0.84; 'dag': 0.84; 'listener': 0.84; 'subject:thought': 0.84
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.us; h= message-id:x-sasl-enc:from:to:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to:references :subject:date; s=mesmtp; bh=Fi6Em2yjGcpq5u+ld1TNVCsWa4o=; b=rWo5 iXeGKDJZbi9s9eKybGMCIgimhA5xobLZwYc1O+JJzNAwE18DSR0YmK31LdIB+47y IliejUJ/BCbfGLRdHL42nM9NqL0qSObYcPrAEEUh+ctC8PIs+tcuuHujWQNWP6vL pCY8EC47QhsivwOYUsAcmhDOJtsCEvkFnmH07iY=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=message-id:x-sasl-enc:from:to :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to :references:subject:date; s=smtpout; bh=Fi6Em2yjGcpq5u+ld1TNVCsW a4o=; b=ETJAgIgjdXsuePuU0kCQLvT5T03ldzj8O70TePjUxRehnA4s/GLcIFv+ XQ52Iva9SjDMFUcJMzsiDF5ij9PwKPrB0HTJDqobJHxX0vc6p3CDZe8rpEqBqXyA 9n7sfBnfWuO/F+dyCDMLICj2ersJ3QjD9oUUwrgxcEg2uWs0jXg=
X-Sasl-Enc: 6aJ+/t6MiIsgNevd4OAIg7ctNBrut3KGDppFB7oBRKEJ 1424755791
From: random832@fastmail.us
To: python-list@python.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-4ba7306c
In-Reply-To: <cl2g0vFfiq9U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <33677AE8-B2FA-49F9-9304-C8D93784255D@gmail.com> <CAPTjJmpEHQV2PpaZvszuTGn0_GNg0sWV6aLenbQsZrSXCy2YKQ@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.18957.1424524392.18130.python-list@python.org> <mcargl$h3k$1@reader1.panix.com> <mailman.19008.1424611304.18130.python-list@python.org> <cl2g0vFfiq9U1@mid.individual.net>
Subject: Re: Design thought for callbacks
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 00:29:51 -0500
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post: <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help: <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.19117.1424755795.18130.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 16
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace: 1424755795 news.xs4all.nl 2920 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:33722
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:86295

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015, at 00:20, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Cem Karan wrote:
> > I tend to structure my code as a tree or DAG of objects.  The owner refers to
> > the owned object, but the owned object has no reference to its owner.  With
> > callbacks, you get cycles, where the owned owns the owner.
> 
> This is why I suggested registering a listener object
> plus a method name instead of a callback. It avoids that
> reference cycle, because there is no long-lived callback
> object keeping a reference to the listener.

How does that help? Everywhere you would have had a reference to the
"callback object", you now have a reference to the listener object.
You're just shuffling deck chairs around: if B shouldn't reference A
because A owns B, then removing C from the B->C->A reference chain does
nothing to fix this.