Author vstinner
Recipients ZackerySpytz, benjamin.peterson, christian.heimes, serhiy.storchaka, terry.reedy, vstinner
Date 2019-04-09.10:36:22
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1554806182.41.0.944377438742.issue18372@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content
> Tracking objects that do not need this will just add work to the garbage collector. Not all instances of trackable types should be tracked, for example the empty tuple and some dicts are not tracked.

Well, in that case, we should do the opposite of PR 8505, what I proposed there:

https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/8505#issuecomment-480763122

"Either GC support must be removed (remove Py_TPFLAGS_HAVE_GC, remove tp_clear and tp_traverse, etc.), or the implementation should be fixed (call PyObject_GC_Track)."

=> fully remove the GC support

I don't see the point of implementing tp_traverse if it's not called.

I'm not sure if tp_clear is related to the GC or not. Maybe keep it :-)
History
Date User Action Args
2019-04-09 10:36:22vstinnersetrecipients: + vstinner, terry.reedy, christian.heimes, benjamin.peterson, serhiy.storchaka, ZackerySpytz
2019-04-09 10:36:22vstinnersetmessageid: <1554806182.41.0.944377438742.issue18372@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2019-04-09 10:36:22vstinnerlinkissue18372 messages
2019-04-09 10:36:22vstinnercreate