How Do Constructors And Destructors Work?

I'm trying to understand this code: class Person: '''Represents a person ''' population = 0 def __init__(self,name): //some statements and population += 1

Solution 1:

Here is a slightly opinionated answer.

Don't use __del__. This is not C++ or a language built for destructors. The __del__ method really should be gone in Python 3.x, though I'm sure someone will find a use case that makes sense. If you need to use __del __, be aware of the basic limitations per http://docs.python.org/reference/datamodel.html:

• __del__ is called when the garbage collector happens to be collecting the objects, not when you lose the last reference to an object and not when you execution del object.
• __del__ is responsible for calling any __del__ in a superclass, though it is not clear if this is in method resolution order (MRO) or just calling each superclass.
• Having a __del__ means that the garbage collector gives up on detecting and cleaning any cyclic links, such as losing the last reference to a linked list. You can get a list of the objects ignored from gc.garbage. You can sometimes use weak references to avoid the cycle altogether. This gets debated now and then: see http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2009-October/006194.html.
• The __del__ function can cheat, saving a reference to an object, and stopping the garbage collection.
• Exceptions explicitly raised in __del__ are ignored.
• __del__ complements __new__ far more than __init__. This gets confusing. See http://www.algorithm.co.il/blogs/index.php/programming/python/python-gotchas-1-del-is-not-the-opposite-of-init/ for an explanation and gotchas.
• __del__ is not a "well-loved" child in Python. You will notice that sys.exit() documentation does not specify if garbage is collected before exiting, and there are lots of odd issues. Calling the __del__ on globals causes odd ordering issues, e.g., http://bugs.python.org/issue5099. Should __del__ called even if the __init__ fails? See http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2000-March/thread.html#2423 for a long thread.

But, on the other hand:

• __del__ means you do not forget to call a close statement. See http://eli.thegreenplace.net/2009/06/12/safely-using-destructors-in-python/ for a pro __del__ viewpoint. This is usually about freeing ctypes or some other special resource.

And my pesonal reason for not liking the __del__ function.

• Everytime someone brings up __del__ it devolves into thirty messages of confusion.
• It breaks these items in the Zen of Python:
  • Complex is better than complicated.
  • Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
  • Errors should never pass silently.
  • In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.
  • There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.
  • If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.

So, find a reason not to use __del__.

Solution 2:

As I understood them from my early CPTS experiance:

Constructors: Constructors are mainly used in classes to initialze the class with values, and gives an oppurtunity to do some background work based on creation. If you pass in values during the creation of an object, this is where you can handle assignment of those values to variables within your class. (In this case, upon construction you are incrementing a variable that keeps track of population).

Destructors: Destructors cleanup a class. In python, due to the garbage collector it's not as important as languages that can leave hanging pointers (c++). (In this case you are decrementing the population variable on destruction of the object).