Egon Smiwa smiwa.e...@googlemail.com added the comment:
You bring the tp_doc parameter pointer
into the ownership of the new typeobject?
and tp_doc is assumed to be created by pyObject_malloc?
IMO, if CPython wants to be the owner of the string parameter,
then it should make a copy of that
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
It's the same as the current tp_doc parameter for static type objects, and
essentially like any other doc string in the C API. It's owned by the extension
module, which must make sure it lives at least as long as the type object.
Egon Smiwa smiwa.e...@googlemail.com added the comment:
Hello, I'm just a app developer which is embedding the python32.dll
and I assumed (and wished) python would simply copy my allocated
parameter-string into the type object (( spec-name) is copied too). I looked
in the source and see this
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
I see. This is an issue independent of the issue discussed here, though, please
open a new issue for that. I agree that either tp_dealloc should not release
the string, or should make a copy that it can release.
--
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
Thansk for the review. Committed as r88400.
--
resolution: - accepted
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11135
Georg Brandl ge...@python.org added the comment:
Looks good.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11135
___
___
Python-bugs-list
New submission from Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de:
There are currently two ways to specify a type doc string in PyType_FromSpec;
either through the doc field (which is not actually processed), or through
Py_tp_doc (which works correctly).
The original concern for adding doc into the
