作为del可以用来做什么的例子，我发现它在这样的情况下很有用:

def f(a, b, c=3):
    return '{} {} {}'.format(a, b, c)

def g(**kwargs):
    if 'c' in kwargs and kwargs['c'] is None:
        del kwargs['c']

    return f(**kwargs)

# g(a=1, b=2, c=None) === '1 2 3'
# g(a=1, b=2) === '1 2 3'
# g(a=1, b=2, c=4) === '1 2 4'

这两个函数可以在不同的包/模块中，程序员不需要知道f中的参数c实际上有什么默认值。因此，通过将kwargs与del结合使用，您可以将其设置为None(或者在这种情况下也可以保留它)，从而说“I want the default value on c”。

你也可以这样做:

def g(a, b, c=None):
    kwargs = {'a': a,
              'b': b}
    if c is not None:
        kwargs['c'] = c

    return f(**kwargs)

然而，我发现前面的例子更加DRY和优雅。

del is the equivalent of "unset" in many languages and as a cross reference point moving from another language to python.. people tend to look for commands that do the same thing that they used to do in their first language... also setting a var to "" or none doesn't really remove the var from scope..it just empties its value the name of the var itself would still be stored in memory...why?!? in a memory intensive script..keeping trash behind its just a no no and anyways...every language out there has some form of an "unset/delete" var function..why not python?

首先，你可以删除除局部变量之外的其他东西

del list_item[4]
del dictionary["alpha"]

这两者显然都是有用的。其次，在局部变量上使用del使意图更加明确。比较:

del foo

to

foo = None

我知道在del foo的情况下，目的是从作用域中删除变量。foo = None是否这样做还不清楚。如果有人只是赋值foo = None，我可能会认为这是死代码。但我立刻就知道，编码del foo的人想要做什么。

有一次我不得不使用:

del serial
serial = None

因为只使用:

serial = None

没有及时释放串口，无法立即再次打开。 从这一课中，我了解到del的真正意思是:“现在就开始!然后等待直到它完成”这在很多情况下都很有用。当然，你可能有一个system.gc.del_this_and_wait_balbalba (obj)。

这是我贡献的2美分:

我有一个优化问题，我使用一个Nlopt库。 我初始化类和它的一些方法，我在代码的其他几个部分使用。

我得到的结果是随机的，即使是同样的数值问题。

我刚刚意识到，通过这样做，一些虚假数据包含在对象中，而它应该没有任何问题。使用del后，我猜内存被正确地清除，这可能是一个内部问题的类，其中一些变量可能不喜欢被重用没有适当的构造函数。

I think one of the reasons that del has its own syntax is that replacing it with a function might be hard in certain cases given it operates on the binding or variable and not the value it references. Thus if a function version of del were to be created a context would need to be passed in. del foo would need to become globals().remove('foo') or locals().remove('foo') which gets messy and less readable. Still I say getting rid of del would be good given its seemingly rare use. But removing language features/flaws can be painful. Maybe python 4 will remove it :)