Message203349
| Author |
pitrou |
| Recipients |
BreamoreBoy, ajaksu2, benjamin.peterson, dcjim, elachuni, gvanrossum, jon, kristjan.jonsson, mark.dickinson, pitrou, qelan, tseaver, vdupras, vstinner |
| Date |
2013年11月19日.10:24:05 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1384856643.2287.2.camel@fsol> |
| In-reply-to |
<1384854663.74.0.917361386967.issue7105@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
> No matter how it sounds, it certainly looks cleaner in code.
It's also unsafe and invasive, since it's a process-wide setting. An
iterator can be long-lived if it's being consumed slowly, so you've
disabled garbage collection for an unknown amount of time, without the
user knowing about it. Another thread could kick in and perhaps
re-enable it for whatever reason.
Oh if someone calls gc.collect() explicitly, the solution is suddenly
defeated. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2013年11月19日 10:24:05 | pitrou | set | recipients:
+ pitrou, gvanrossum, dcjim, tseaver, mark.dickinson, kristjan.jonsson, vstinner, ajaksu2, jon, benjamin.peterson, vdupras, elachuni, BreamoreBoy, qelan |
| 2013年11月19日 10:24:05 | pitrou | link | issue7105 messages |
| 2013年11月19日 10:24:05 | pitrou | create |
|