Lenard Lindstrom <le...@telus.net> added the comment: >I don't know why you're saying that. The purpose of PyBuffer_Release is >precisely to solve these kinds of use cases (where you want timely >release of a resource rather than rely on the garbage collector).
Yes, I was unclear. This refers to Python 3.2, not the 2.x series. PyObject_AsReadBuffer (defined at line 270 in abstract.c, code of routine attached) calls bf_getbuffer with the PyBUF_SIMPLE flag to retrieve a bytes buffer. It then calls bf_releasebuffer before returning the buffer to the caller. PyObject_AsCharBuffer and PyObject_AsWriteBuffer do the same. It is not be exactly the same issue discussed so far, but is closely related. Deprecating PyObject_AsReadBuffer is extreme, and doesn't solve the early release problem. Redefining the PyBUF_SIMPLE flag to be like the old buffer protocol warns those implementing a new buffer interface to avoid processing PyBUF_SIMPLE requests when locking is required. ---------- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file19048/PyObject_AsReadBuffer.c _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9602> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
