Hrvoje Nikšić wrote: > On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 13:15 +0200, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: >>> To put it another way, would it actually matter if the reference >>> counts for such objects became hopelessly wrong due to non-atomic >>> adjustments? >> If they drop to zero (which may happen due to non-atomic adjustments), >> Python will try to release the static memory, which will crash the >> malloc implementation. > > More precisely, Python will call the deallocator appropriate for the > object type. If that deallocator does nothing, the object continues to > live. Such objects could also start out with a refcount of sys.maxint > or so to ensure that calls to the no-op deallocator are unlikely. > The thought of adding references is amusing. What happens when a refcount becomes negative by overflow? I know, I should read the source ...
regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com Skype: holdenweb http://del.icio.us/steve.holden Sorry, the dog ate my .sigline _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
