On Jan 8, 2009, at 4:10 PM, Michael Abshoff wrote: > Robert Bradshaw wrote: >> On Jan 8, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Michael Abshoff wrote: >> >>> Robert Bradshaw wrote: >>>> Thanks! I think this will help immensely for watching for memory >>>> leaks in Sage. >>> Yep, this is great. Given that Dag seems to have been slowed down by >>> real world things I am curious what needs to be done to get this >>> into a >>> more usable state? Linux only is fine for me for now, but if this >>> depeneds on 0.11-devel I would probably be not be able to use this. >> >> I am pretty sure it depends on 0.11-devel. In fact, it was written in >> part *for* 0.11 as the temporary variable handle has been revised and >> we want to catch any refcounting errors this may have introduced. > > Sure, I am tempted to drop in 0.11-devel and see if it compiles the > Sage > library and if it then even starts Sage :).
I've been meaning to do the same too, but just haven't had time. I haven't tried compiling Sage with 0.11 for too long... > Hopefully 0.11 will come soon Yep. I think the primary bottleneck is the above (and fixing any bugs we find there). I would also like a "memleak" mode for doctests, like the timing code, where it would run each block, say, twice, then get the memory usage, then run the block again and see if it went up at all. This would be great to have in general, but would also make me much happier knowing I didn't introduce new memory leaks. > and we will find a way to integrate the refcount nanny as a special > mode during doctesting of Sage, i.e. during compile time of Cython > activate it and if we then somehow could have the doctesting framework > have some mode where *every* reference was watched this would truly > rock. If this is expensive performance wise it doesn't matter since it > would be a special debug mode :) Yeah. Even if it was slower, it wouldn't be as slow as Valgrind. - Robert _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
