Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
> /* info->obj is either NULL or a borrowed reference. This
> reference should not be decremented in PyBuffer_Release(). */
The semantics of PyMemoryView_FromBuffer() are problematic. This function
is the odd one in memoryobject.c since it's the only function that
Hi,
I am currently hitting http://bugs.python.org/issue13992.
I have a scenario that reproduces the bug after 1 to 2 hours (intensive
sqlalchemy and threading). I get the same stack trace as described in the
bug.
After spending quite a bit of time trying to understand what could go wrong
in the
Hello,
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:39:41 +0200
Manu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently hitting http://bugs.python.org/issue13992.
>
> I have a scenario that reproduces the bug after 1 to 2 hours (intensive
> sqlalchemy and threading). I get the same stack trace as described in the
> bug.
>
[...]
>
>
Am 30.08.12 14:39, schrieb Manu:
After spending quite a bit of time trying to understand what could go
wrong in the C extensions I use, and not finding anything interesting, I
decided to try to find the problem with gdb. The stacktrace I have seems
to mean that we are trying to double free someth
If one goes to http://hg.python.org/cpython/ and clicks 'browse', it
defaults to 2.7, not to default (now 3.3). Moreover, there is no
indication that it is defaulting to an old branch rather than current
default, as one might reasonably expect. I found this very confusing
when I was trying to g
In article , Terry Reedy
wrote:
> If one goes to http://hg.python.org/cpython/ and clicks 'browse', it
> defaults to 2.7, not to default (now 3.3). Moreover, there is no
> indication that it is defaulting to an old branch rather than current
> default, as one might reasonably expect. I found
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 8:49 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> Am 30.08.12 14:39, schrieb Manu:
>
> After spending quite a bit of time trying to understand what could go
>> wrong in the C extensions I use, and not finding anything interesting, I
>> decided to try to find the problem with gdb. The st
Ned Deily wrote:
In article , Terry Reedy
wrote:
If one goes to http://hg.python.org/cpython/ and clicks 'browse', it
defaults to 2.7, not to default (now 3.3). Moreover, there is no
indication that it is defaulting to an old branch rather than current
default, as one might reasonably expec
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:34:56 -0700
Ethan Furman wrote:
> Ned Deily wrote:
> > In article , Terry Reedy
> > wrote:
> >
> >> If one goes to http://hg.python.org/cpython/ and clicks 'browse', it
> >> defaults to 2.7, not to default (now 3.3). Moreover, there is no
> >> indication that it is defa
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> If one goes to http://hg.python.org/cpython/ and clicks 'browse', it
> defaults to 2.7, not to default (now 3.3). Moreover, there is no indication
> that it is defaulting to an old branch rather than current default, as one
> might reasonably
In article <20120830224616.5b6d4...@pitrou.net>,
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:34:56 -0700
> Ethan Furman wrote:
> > Ned Deily wrote:
> > > In article , Terry Reedy
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> If one goes to http://hg.python.org/cpython/ and clicks 'browse', it
> > >> d
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:34:56 -0700
Ethan Furman wrote:
Ned Deily wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
If one goes to http://hg.python.org/cpython/ and clicks 'browse', it
defaults to 2.7, not to default (now 3.3). Moreover, there is no
indication that it is defaulting to an old br
Am 30.08.12 22:34, schrieb Ethan Furman:
If one goes to http://hg.python.org/cpython/ and clicks 'browse', it
defaults to 2.7, not to default (now 3.3). Moreover, there is no
indication that it is defaulting to an old branch rather than current
default, as one might reasonably expect. I found thi
Am 30.08.12 22:22, schrieb Manu:
That's right, sorry. The reason why I think this is a double free is
that the op seems to point to an object that has been deallocated by python.
(gdb) select-frame 0
(gdb) print *op
$6 = {_ob_next = 0x0, _ob_prev = 0x0, ob_refcnt = 0, ob_type = 0x2364020}
Does
We have use for _PyBytes_Join in an extension module but technically it
isn't a public Python C API... anyone know why?
PyUnicode_Join is.
Looking up the bytes 'join' method and using the C API to call that method
object with proper parameters seems like overkill in the case where we're
not deali
On 31/08/2012 02:43, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
We have use for _PyBytes_Join in an extension module but technically it
isn't a public Python C API... anyone know why?
PyUnicode_Join is.
Looking up the bytes 'join' method and using the C API to call that
method object with proper parameters seems
After this discussion it seemed wiser to submit my proposed 1.2 edits
as Metadata 1.3, adding Provides-Extra, Setup-Requires-Dist, and
Extension (with no defined registration procedure). This version is
sure to be exciting as it also specifies that the values are UTF-8
with tolerant decoding and re
17 matches
Mail list logo
