On Oct 27, 1:26 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2007, at 9:35 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> >>> Carl Witty was also wondering whether your newCython.spkg was ready
> >>> for 2.8.10 or if we should wait.
>
> >> I believe so, it compiles all of SAGE and passes all doctests. Stefan
> >> (the other mainCythonguy) is having trouble getting his code to
> >> work though.
>
> > ok.
>
Hi Robert,
> BTW, I just uploaded a new spkg with one more tiny fix (has to do
> with error reporting).
>
For 2.8.10.alpha1+Craig's fix and python compiled using "--without-
pymalloc" I get with the default cleanup level 1:
==6569== LEAK SUMMARY:
==6569== definitely lost: 181,030 bytes in 2,926 blocks.
==6569== possibly lost: 266,925 bytes in 747 blocks.
==6569== still reachable: 29,184,388 bytes in 179,707 blocks.
==6569== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks.
With cleanup level 3 in general and cleanup level 1 just for
integer.pyx I get
==23818== LEAK SUMMARY:
==23818== definitely lost: 181,117 bytes in 2,927 blocks.
==23818== possibly lost: 266,838 bytes in 746 blocks.
==23818== still reachable: 29,157,453 bytes in 179,383 blocks.
==23818== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks.
So my conclusion is that you are on the right way with the cleanup
code. Hopefully once we can compile integer.pyx with cleanup level 3
and not crash the amount of still reachable memory should decrease
tremendously because integer.pyx should just about be referenced in
every extension we have.
> - Robert
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
