[ python-Bugs-1342811 ] Tkinter.Menu.delete doesn't delete command of entry
Bugs item #1342811, was opened at 2005-10-30 22:49 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1342811&group_id=5470 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Tkinter Group: Python 2.3 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Sverker Nilsson (svenil) Assigned to: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) Summary: Tkinter.Menu.delete doesn't delete command of entry Initial Comment: Tkinter.Menu.delete does not delete the commands defined for the entries it deletes. Those objects will be retained until the menu itself is deleted. For example, after code like this: button = Menubutton(root, text='Window') menu = Menu(button) button['menu'] = menu def command(): print 'command button pressed' menu.add_command(command=command) menu.delete(END) del command the command function will still be referenced and kept in memory - until the menu object itself is destroyed. This may not always be a serious problem, but in my case the menu was a 'Window' menu and the command was a method on a window top level widget, so retaining a pointer to it after deleting the menu entry kept a reference to that entire window, with any associated data. I have figured out a possible fix that is in the attached file test_menuleak.py that contains some test functions. I also changed the comment - for as far as I can see, the second optional index is actually INCLUDED in the range of entries deleted. Version info Python 2.3.3 (#2, Mar 11 2004, 19:45:43) [GCC 2.95.2 2220 (Debian GNU/Linux)] on linux2 I think it applies to all versions: I tested with the latest 2.4.2 as well. Sverker Nilsson -- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1342811&group_id=5470 ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[ python-Bugs-1338264 ] Memory keeping
Bugs item #1338264, was opened at 2005-10-26 15:37 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sin_avatar You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1338264&group_id=5470 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Python Interpreter Core Group: Python 2.4 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: sin (sin_avatar) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Memory keeping Initial Comment: I execute this code on python 2.4.2 (authentic copy from console): Python 2.4.2 (#1, Oct 26 2005, 14:45:33) [GCC 2.95.4 20020320 [FreeBSD]] on freebsd4 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> a = range(1,1000) >>> del a before i type del - i run top and get (see console output below): 16300 sin 2 0 162M 161M poll 0:02 35.76% 9.28% python2.4 after del (console below): 16300 sin 2 0 162M 161M poll 0:03 7.18% 6.05% python2.4 I tried gc too ... but python didn't free memory. I checked this on windows - memory was freed, but interpreter with 0 defined variables "eat" about 75 Mb!. I think this is bug in interpereter core. some text from dmesg for you: Copyright (c) 1992-2003 The FreeBSD Project. Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE #0: Thu Apr 3 10:53:38 GMT 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/ GENERIC Timecounter "i8254" frequency 1193182 Hz CPU: Pentium III/Pentium III Xeon/Celeron (499.15-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x673 Stepping = 3 Features=0x387f9ff real memory = 268369920 (262080K bytes) avail memory = 255901696 (249904K bytes) -- >Comment By: sin (sin_avatar) Date: 2005-10-31 11:15 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1368129 Certainly, i 'am not a C guru, but i uderstood - if interpreter keep more than 100Mb, and not keep useful information - it's suxx. Fore example if i use my script as a part Zope portal - it would be awful. Certainly my script was just example - but if i use mult-thread server wrote on python and create list in each thread - i would take memory from system and i cannot give it back. -- Comment By: Tim Peters (tim_one) Date: 2005-10-28 01:38 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=31435 Space for integer objects in particular lives in an immortal free list of unbounded size, so it's certain in the current implementation that doing range(1000) will hang on to space for 10 million integers forever. If you don't want that, don't do that ;-) Iterating over xrange(1000) instead will consume very little RAM. -- Comment By: Josiah Carlson (josiahcarlson) Date: 2005-10-28 01:29 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=341410 >From what I understand, whether or not the Python runtime "frees" memory (which can be freed) is generally dependant on platform malloc() and free(). -- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1338264&group_id=5470 ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[ python-Bugs-1338264 ] Memory keeping
Bugs item #1338264, was opened at 2005-10-26 02:37 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by josiahcarlson You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1338264&group_id=5470 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Python Interpreter Core Group: Python 2.4 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: sin (sin_avatar) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Memory keeping Initial Comment: I execute this code on python 2.4.2 (authentic copy from console): Python 2.4.2 (#1, Oct 26 2005, 14:45:33) [GCC 2.95.4 20020320 [FreeBSD]] on freebsd4 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> a = range(1,1000) >>> del a before i type del - i run top and get (see console output below): 16300 sin 2 0 162M 161M poll 0:02 35.76% 9.28% python2.4 after del (console below): 16300 sin 2 0 162M 161M poll 0:03 7.18% 6.05% python2.4 I tried gc too ... but python didn't free memory. I checked this on windows - memory was freed, but interpreter with 0 defined variables "eat" about 75 Mb!. I think this is bug in interpereter core. some text from dmesg for you: Copyright (c) 1992-2003 The FreeBSD Project. Copyright (c) 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE #0: Thu Apr 3 10:53:38 GMT 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/ GENERIC Timecounter "i8254" frequency 1193182 Hz CPU: Pentium III/Pentium III Xeon/Celeron (499.15-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x673 Stepping = 3 Features=0x387f9ff real memory = 268369920 (262080K bytes) avail memory = 255901696 (249904K bytes) -- Comment By: Josiah Carlson (josiahcarlson) Date: 2005-10-30 22:56 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=341410 Suggested close because and/or: a) not a bug (integer freelists) b) platform specific malloc/free behavior on the list->ob_item member (some platforms will drop to 121M allocated memory after the deletion) c) OP didn't listen when it was suggested they use xrange() instead of range() -- Comment By: sin (sin_avatar) Date: 2005-10-30 22:15 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1368129 Certainly, i 'am not a C guru, but i uderstood - if interpreter keep more than 100Mb, and not keep useful information - it's suxx. Fore example if i use my script as a part Zope portal - it would be awful. Certainly my script was just example - but if i use mult-thread server wrote on python and create list in each thread - i would take memory from system and i cannot give it back. -- Comment By: Tim Peters (tim_one) Date: 2005-10-27 12:38 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=31435 Space for integer objects in particular lives in an immortal free list of unbounded size, so it's certain in the current implementation that doing range(1000) will hang on to space for 10 million integers forever. If you don't want that, don't do that ;-) Iterating over xrange(1000) instead will consume very little RAM. -- Comment By: Josiah Carlson (josiahcarlson) Date: 2005-10-27 12:29 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=341410 >From what I understand, whether or not the Python runtime "frees" memory (which can be freed) is generally dependant on platform malloc() and free(). -- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1338264&group_id=5470 ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
