Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
theconsensus.dev
Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
1–10 of 85 posts
Re: Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
#2If they didn't have very good objective reasons the new GC is better, they never should have shipped it. If they do, they should not have reverted the change.
Re: Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
#3> Python 3.14.0 introduced a new incremental garbage collector. But reports of higher memory usage caused the Python team to revert the garbage collector changes in 3.14.5. If they didn't have very good objective reasons the new GC is better, they never should have shipped it. If they do, they should not have reverted the change.
I felt like the tooling in Racket, CLisp, and Java were similarly pragmatic and not either religiously devoted to some concept of "backwards compatibility" that I seriously doubt most people actually need, or "ease of use" that actually proves itself to be easy when you consider the not-happy-path of the beginner tutorials. Racket, I didn't continue just because the library ecosystem isn't mature enough to keep up with the latest in databases and other 3rd party services. Java I quit largely because of Oracle and some 2010s problems with stagnation. CLisp mostly because it was too hard to socialize. But never because I thought the core language and tooling were holding me back.
Re: Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
#4Re: Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
#5> Python 3.14.0 introduced a new incremental garbage collector. But reports of higher memory usage caused the Python team to revert the garbage collector changes in 3.14.5. If they didn't have very good objective reasons the new GC is better, they never should have shipped it. If they do, they should not have reverted the change.
Re: Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
#6> Python 3.14.0 introduced a new incremental garbage collector. But reports of higher memory usage caused the Python team to revert the garbage collector changes in 3.14.5. If they didn't have very good objective reasons the new GC is better, they never should have shipped it. If they do, they should not have reverted the change.
It's this sort of stuff that leaves me scratching my head why people like Python so much. I hear them say they prefer the syntax and personally I feel like that's such a small part of the holistic experience of working with any particular language. It's one of the reasons why I gave up on C++ years ago for .NET, the whole system of tooling in .NET has never left me feeling like I was pigeonholed into doing things in…
Re: Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
#7Figuring out how to measure the size of an object can be tricky of course, but I suspect there’s all sorts of things you could try including figuring out how much memory got deallocated after you gc a cycle and attributing it to where the object got allocated as a heuristic to measure the mean allocation size.
Re: Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
#8> Python 3.14.0 introduced a new incremental garbage collector. But reports of higher memory usage caused the Python team to revert the garbage collector changes in 3.14.5. If they didn't have very good objective reasons the new GC is better, they never should have shipped it. If they do, they should not have reverted the change.
Re: Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
#9> Python 3.14.0 introduced a new incremental garbage collector. But reports of higher memory usage caused the Python team to revert the garbage collector changes in 3.14.5. If they didn't have very good objective reasons the new GC is better, they never should have shipped it. If they do, they should not have reverted the change.
It's this sort of stuff that leaves me scratching my head why people like Python so much. I hear them say they prefer the syntax and personally I feel like that's such a small part of the holistic experience of working with any particular language. It's one of the reasons why I gave up on C++ years ago for .NET, the whole system of tooling in .NET has never left me feeling like I was pigeonholed into doing things in…
Packaging can be irritating although uv takes the sting out a bit.
You are right that outside of verbosity, once you get used to the syntax of a language, the value of one over the other kind of fades.
Re: Python 3.14 garbage collection rigamarole
#10> Python 3.14.0 introduced a new incremental garbage collector. But reports of higher memory usage caused the Python team to revert the garbage collector changes in 3.14.5. If they didn't have very good objective reasons the new GC is better, they never should have shipped it. If they do, they should not have reverted the change.
It's this sort of stuff that leaves me scratching my head why people like Python so much. I hear them say they prefer the syntax and personally I feel like that's such a small part of the holistic experience of working with any particular language. It's one of the reasons why I gave up on C++ years ago for .NET, the whole system of tooling in .NET has never left me feeling like I was pigeonholed into doing things in…
Because of the libraries, not necessarily the language, which is also quite straightforward. For example we found a niche library that speaks the ISO-TP protocol in Python, which allows us to communicate with vehicle ECUs. That's why people also use C++, even tough I quite doubt it's because they like the language. Add to that that it's also heavily used in embedded programming. Yes, you could call a C/C++ library from another language, depending how well the language can do that.
I prefer Ruby, but Python probably has just about everything one would need. It's also great for data processing. We hardly have anything better than pandas, polars, numpy, scipy in other languages and that:s without even mentioning ML tooling.