Humpty Dumpty oliver.schoenborn at utoronto.ca
Sat Jun 12 20:18:07 EDT 2004

• Previous message (by thread): does python have useless destructors?
• Next message (by thread): does python have useless destructors?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

"Isaac To" <kkto at csis.hku.hk> wrote in message
news:7iy8msdf8u.fsf at enark.csis.hku.hk...
> Unluckily, currently there is no concept of "local scoped objects" in
> Python.  What it means is that a variable can be local, but an object
> cannot.  An object in Python is always heap allocated, so there is no way
to
> know that whether an object has a reference staying outside the current
> scope when the current scope exits---short of dictating how the garbage
> collector works (i.e., it must count reference).  I think the primary
> developer in Python has already completely rejected the very idea,
probably
> because it is impractical to implement in Jython.

I have been hearing a lot of reference to Jython. This is yet another
example how coupling languages can stifle their progress: C++ is stifled by
its need for compatilibity with C, now clearly Python is becoming stifled by
a need for compatibility with Jython.
Oliver

---

• Previous message (by thread): does python have useless destructors?
• Next message (by thread): does python have useless destructors?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-list mailing list