Alexander Belopolsky added the comment: On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Stefan Krah <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > Now I'm puzzled: I thought your goal was to preserve the implicit cleanup > from 3.2, i.e. PyBuffer_Release() is called when the managed buffer is > deallocated. >
The issue that I raised in msg169472 above was that PyMemoryView_FromBuffer() would not copy .obj from Py_buffer structure to the memoryview. A related issue is that it looks like PyObject_GetBuffer() often does not fill .obj either. I would expect that PyObject_GetBuffer() would always store a new reference in .obj to assure that the .buf pointer remains valid until PyBuffer_Release() is called explicitly. (I am ignoring the issue of mutable objects such as lists for the moment.) PyMemoryView_FromBuffer() in turn should store an additional reference in its own private copy of Py_buffer structure. After PyMemoryView_FromBuffer() returns a well-behaved program should call PyBuffer_Release() releasing the first reference and the second reference should be released in memoryview destructor. Am I missing something? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15821> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
