The del self. self simply removes the unwanted self attribute on the object named by the name self. __del__ is a reserved function in Python that is called when the last reference to an object is being deleted or goes out of scope.
Destructors are called when an object gets destroyed. In Python, destructors are not needed as much as in C++ because Python has a garbage collector that handles memory management automatically. The __del__() method is a known as a destructor method in Python.
The del keyword in python is primarily used to delete objects in Python. Since everything in python represents an object in one way or another, The del keyword can also be used to delete a list, slice a list, delete a dictionaries, remove key-value pairs from a dictionary, delete variables, etc.
The del keyword is used to delete objects. In Python everything is an object, so the del keyword can also be used to delete variables, lists, or parts of a list etc.
'self' is only a reference to the object. 'del self' is deleting the 'self' reference from the local namespace of the kill function, instead of the actual object.
To see this for yourself, look at what happens when these two functions are executed:
>>> class A():
... def kill_a(self):
... print self
... del self
... def kill_b(self):
... del self
... print self
...
>>> a = A()
>>> b = A()
>>> a.kill_a()
<__main__.A instance at 0xb771250c>
>>> b.kill_b()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
File "<stdin>", line 7, in kill_b
UnboundLocalError: local variable 'self' referenced before assignment
You don't need to use del to delete instances in the first place. Once the last reference to an object is gone, the object will be garbage collected. Maybe you should tell us more about the full problem.
I think I've finally got it!
NOTE: You should not use this in normal code, but it is possible.
This is only meant as a curiosity, see other answers for real-world solutions to this problem.
# NOTE: This is Python 3 code, it should work with python 2, but I haven't tested it.
import weakref
class InsaneClass(object):
_alive = []
def __new__(cls):
self = super().__new__(cls)
InsaneClass._alive.append(self)
return weakref.proxy(self)
def commit_suicide(self):
self._alive.remove(self)
instance = InsaneClass()
instance.commit_suicide()
print(instance)
# Raises Error: ReferenceError: weakly-referenced object no longer exists
When the object is created in the __new__
method, the instance is replaced by a weak reference proxy and the only strong reference is kept in the _alive class attribute.
Weak-reference is a reference which does not count as a reference when the garbage collector collects the object. Consider this example:
>>> class Test(): pass
>>> a = Test()
>>> b = Test()
>>> c = a
>>> d = weakref.proxy(b)
>>> d
<weakproxy at 0x10671ae58 to Test at 0x10670f4e0>
# The weak reference points to the Test() object
>>> del a
>>> c
<__main__.Test object at 0x10670f390> # c still exists
>>> del b
>>> d
<weakproxy at 0x10671ab38 to NoneType at 0x1002050d0>
# d is now only a weak-reference to None. The Test() instance was garbage-collected
So the only strong reference to the instance is stored in the _alive class attribute. And when the commit_suicide() method removes the reference the instance is garbage-collected.
In this specific context, your example doesn't make a lot of sense.
When a Being picks up an Item, the item retains an individual existence. It doesn't disappear because it's been picked up. It still exists, but it's (a) in the same location as the Being, and (b) no longer eligible to be picked up. While it's had a state change, it still exists.
There is a two-way association between Being and Item. The Being has the Item in a collection. The Item is associated with a Being.
When an Item is picked up by a Being, two things have to happen.
The Being how adds the Item in some set
of items. Your bag
attribute, for example, could be such a set
. [A list
is a poor choice -- does order matter in the bag?]
The Item's location changes from where it used to be to the Being's location. There are probably two classes os Items - those with an independent sense of location (because they move around by themselves) and items that have to delegate location to the Being or Place where they're sitting.
Under no circumstances does any Python object ever need to get deleted. If an item is "destroyed", then it's not in a Being's bag. It's not in a location.
player.bag.remove(cat)
Is all that's required to let the cat out of the bag. Since the cat is not used anywhere else, it will both exist as "used" memory and not exist because nothing in your program can access it. It will quietly vanish from memory when some quantum event occurs and memory references are garbage collected.
On the other hand,
here.add( cat )
player.bag.remove(cat)
Will put the cat in the current location. The cat continues to exist, and will not be put out with the garbage.
Realistically you should not need to delete the object to do what you are trying to do. Instead you can change the state of the object. An example of how this works without getting into the coding would be your player fighting a monster and killing the monster. The state of this monster is fighting. The monster will be accessing all methods needed for fighting. When the monster dies because his health drops to 0, the monsters state will change to dead and your character will stop attacking automatically. This methodology is very similar to using flags or even keywords.
Also apparently in python deleting classes is not required since they will be garbage collected automatically when they are not used anymore.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With