# I've reproduced this with some recent versions:
found 2.8.10.1-3
found 2.8.10.1+dfsg-4
found 2.8.12.1-1
thanks
On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 07:25:12PM +0930, Ron wrote:
> I can reproduce this one in 2.4.2.4, in 2.4 branch head, and
> in 2.5.1. Should he just not be doing this (DateTime() doesn't
> return a valid object reference?) or is this a real bug?
I suspect it's a reference counting bug in the SWIG generated code. I've
not looked at the code here though.
> > When creating a new wxDateTime object with a specified number of seconds
> > since 01-01-1970, SetTimeT returns random dates and eventually
> > segfaults. See the following interaction between me and the python
> > interpreter:
> >
> > >>> import wx
> > >>> d=wx.DateTime().SetTimeT(0)
> > >>> d
> > <wxDateTime: "wo 28 mei 633986 15:01:41 CET" at _828ea68_wxDateTime_p>
Interestingly, if I run under valgrind, I consistently get the answer I'd
expect. Python is a bit noisy under valgrind, so it's hard to see if it
is reporting an issue, but I suspect what is happening is that d gets
released and normally is partly overwritten by the time we try to print it
out, but valgrind's malloc replacement doesn't overwrite that part of the
object.
Cheers,
Olly
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
