On 01/07/2008, Tony Cappellini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In VB6 ( I have not worked with VB.NET), objects are set to Nothing when > they go out of scope, yet there is a fair amount lot of code out there where > objects are explicitly set to Nothing. This is a pretty common practice in > VB land. > > >>but in Python these statements are unnecessary. > What happened to "Explicit is better than implicit"?
If a name goes out of scope in python, you can't get at it anyway. I guess if you're worried about it, you could do 'del [var]' every time you finish using a local variable -- but the only point of this would be as a way of telling the programmer: "I have finished with this variable." If your functions are small enough to fit on a page, the programmer should be able to see that anyway. Sure, explicit is better than implicit, but worrying about what happens to local variables when they go out of scope is a bridge too far for most people. (I don't want to criticise VB programmers because I am not one. "Follow the local conventions" is generally always a good rule of programming) -- John. _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
