gh-98154: Clarify Usage of "Reference Count" In the Docs #107552
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks @ericsnowcurrently for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.12. |
miss-islington
pushed a commit
to miss-islington/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2023
…ngh-107552) PEP 683 (immortal objects) revealed some ways in which the Python documentation has been unnecessarily coupled to the implementation details of reference counts. In the end users should focus on reference ownership, including taking references and releasing them, rather than on how many reference counts an object has. This change updates the documentation to reflect that perspective. It also updates the docs relative to immortal objects in a handful of places. (cherry picked from commit 5dc825d) Co-authored-by: Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com>
|
GH-107752 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.12 branch. |
Yhg1s
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2023
…07552) (#107752) * gh-98154: Clarify Usage of "Reference Count" In the Docs (gh-107552) PEP 683 (immortal objects) revealed some ways in which the Python documentation has been unnecessarily coupled to the implementation details of reference counts. In the end users should focus on reference ownership, including taking references and releasing them, rather than on how many reference counts an object has. This change updates the documentation to reflect that perspective. It also updates the docs relative to immortal objects in a handful of places. (cherry picked from commit 5dc825d) Co-authored-by: Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com> * Fix a typo. --------- Co-authored-by: Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
PEP 683 (immortal objects) revealed some ways in which the Python documentation has been unnecessarily coupled to the implementation details of reference counts. In the end users should focus on reference ownership, including taking references and releasing them, rather than on how many reference counts an object has.
This change updates the documentation to reflect that perspective. It also updates the docs relative to immortal objects in a handful of places.
(This should also be backported to 3.10 and 3.11, minus 3.12-specific details.)
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--107552.org.readthedocs.build/