Message166782
| Author | loewis |
|---|---|
| Recipients | cvrebert, docs@python, eric.snow, jcea, loewis, meador.inge, pitrou, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka |
| Date | 2012-07-29.16:18:04 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1343578685.01.0.787516894062.issue15436@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
rhettinger: users frequently need sys.getsizeof. See, for example, http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1331471/in-memory-size-of-python-stucture http://stackoverflow.com/questions/449560/how-do-i-determine-the-size-of-an-object-in-python http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2117255/python-deep-getsizeof-list-with-contents http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11301295/measure-object-size-accurately-in-python-sys-getsizeof-not-functioning [and so on] In what cases, do you think, it generates meaningless results? I find the results for the shared-keys dictionary quite meaningful and natural. sys.getsizeof is certainly CPython-specific. However, __sizeof__ is not just an implementation detail of sys.getsizeof, just as __len__ is not an implementation detail of len(). Authors of extension types are supposed to implement it if object.__sizeof__ is incorrect. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2012-07-29 16:18:05 | loewis | set | recipients: + loewis, rhettinger, jcea, pitrou, cvrebert, meador.inge, docs@python, eric.snow, serhiy.storchaka |
| 2012-07-29 16:18:05 | loewis | set | messageid: <1343578685.01.0.787516894062.issue15436@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2012-07-29 16:18:04 | loewis | link | issue15436 messages |
| 2012-07-29 16:18:04 | loewis | create | |