Message188882
> 1) the mro tuple in the type object is "nerfed" to contain a
> Py_None reference in its first place
I like the idea, but I find the implementation (the new macros) quite convoluted. I think special-casing the first tuple element where necessary would be cleaner.
> 2) the descriptors are modified to hold a weak-reference to the target
> type, rather than a strong reference.
What would happen if someone keeps a reference to the descriptor and not to the class object? Is it a possible use case?
> 3) Fix process cleanup.
This was already done in changeset 6f4627a65c0a. You might want to update your working copy.
Does your patch cater to all possible implicit cycles, or only a subset of them? |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2013-05-10 21:05:16 | pitrou | set | recipients:
+ pitrou, amaury.forgeotdarc, kristjan.jonsson |
2013-05-10 21:05:16 | pitrou | set | messageid: <1368219916.35.0.887226535786.issue17950@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2013-05-10 21:05:16 | pitrou | link | issue17950 messages |
2013-05-10 21:05:16 | pitrou | create | |
|