I've just fixed a bug where Py_INCREF wasn't called when it should
have been before a call to PyModule_AddObject (rev. 2.62 of
Modules/threadmodule.c).
So I went looking for other instances of the same problem. I didn't
find any (though I don't understand how _csv.c gets away with line
1579), but
Michael> So I went looking for other instances of the same problem. I
Michael> didn't find any (though I don't understand how _csv.c gets away
Michael> with line 1579)...
Same reason the Py_INCREF of ProfileError isn't necessary I think.
PyDict_New() returns a new reference which is
Skip Montanaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Michael> So I went looking for other instances of the same problem. I
> Michael> didn't find any (though I don't understand how _csv.c gets away
> Michael> with line 1579)...
>
> Same reason the Py_INCREF of ProfileError isn't necessary I t
Michael> ... (though I don't understand how _csv.c gets away
Michael> with line 1579)...
Michael> Oops; I meant line 1590.
Hmmm... Me either. Is it possible it was just never DECREF'd? I checked
in the obvious fix on both head and the 2.4 release branch.
Skip
Hi Michael,
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 01:35:35PM +0100, Michael Hudson wrote:
> if (ProfilerError == NULL)
> ProfilerError = PyErr_NewException("hotshot.ProfilerError",
>NULL, NULL);
> if (ProfilerError != NULL) {
>
Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 01:35:35PM +0100, Michael Hudson wrote:
>> if (ProfilerError == NULL)
>> ProfilerError = PyErr_NewException("hotshot.ProfilerError",
>>NULL, NULL);
>
Michael Hudson wrote:
> if (ProfilerError == NULL)
> ProfilerError = PyErr_NewException("hotshot.ProfilerError",
>NULL, NULL);
> if (ProfilerError != NULL) {
> Py_INCREF(ProfilerError);
> PyModule_A
"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Michael Hudson wrote:
>
>> if (ProfilerError == NULL)
>> ProfilerError = PyErr_NewException("hotshot.ProfilerError",
>>NULL, NULL);
>> if (ProfilerError != NULL) {
>>
Michael Hudson wrote:
> I've been looking at this area partly to try and understand this bug:
>
> [ 1163563 ] Sub threads execute in restricted mode
>
> but I'm not sure the whole idea of multiple interpreters isn't
> inherently doomed :-/
That's what Tim asserts, saying that people who want
"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Michael Hudson wrote:
>> I've been looking at this area partly to try and understand this bug:
>>
>> [ 1163563 ] Sub threads execute in restricted mode
>>
>> but I'm not sure the whole idea of multiple interpreters isn't
>> inherently doomed :-
[Michael Hudson]
>> I've been looking at this area partly to try and understand this bug:
>>
>> [ 1163563 ] Sub threads execute in restricted mode
>>
>> but I'm not sure the whole idea of multiple interpreters isn't
>> inherently doomed :-/
[Martin v. Löwis]
> That's what Tim asserts, saying t
11 matches
Mail list logo