Boy am I wanting RAII from C++ for automatic freeing when scope is
left. Maybe we need to come up with a similar thing, like all memory
that should be freed once a scope is left must use some special struct
that stores references to all created memory locally and then a free
call must be
Niko Matsakis wrote:
Boy am I wanting RAII from C++ for automatic freeing when scope is
left. Maybe we need to come up with a similar thing, like all memory
that should be freed once a scope is left must use some special struct
that stores references to all created memory locally and then a free
By the way, I liked the sound of the arena/pool tree - really good idea.
Thomas Lee wrote:
Niko Matsakis wrote:
Boy am I wanting RAII from C++ for automatic freeing when scope is
left. Maybe we need to come up with a similar thing, like all memory
that should be freed once a scope is left
Thomas Lee wrote:
As the writer of the crappy code that sparked this conversation, I feel
I should say something :)
Don't feel bad about it. It turned out the 'helpful' review comments from Neal
and I didn't originally work out very well either ;)
With the AST compiler being so new, this is
Just messing around with some ideas. I was trying to avoid the ugly
macros (note my earlier whinge about a learning curve) but they're the
cleanest way I could think of to get around the problem without
resorting to a mass deallocation right at the end of the AST run. Which
may not be all that
Phillip J. Eby:
did you ever try using IPython, and confirm whether it
does or does not address the issue
As I understand it, using IPython (or otherwise changing
the interactive mode) works fine *if* you just want a point
solution -- get something up in some environment chosen
by the
Hi,
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 07:08:15AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The full svn status output is
% svn status
! .
! Python
The ! definitely mean that these items are missing, or for
directories, incomplete in some way. You need to play around until the
! goes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Travis More to the point, however, these scalar objects were allocated
Travis using the standard PyObject_New and PyObject_Del functions which
Travis of course use the Python memory manager. One user ported his
Travis (long-running) code to the new scipy
Travis Oliphant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Travis More to the point, however, these scalar objects were allocated
Travis using the standard PyObject_New and PyObject_Del functions which
Travis of course use the Python memory manager. One user ported his
Josiah Carlson wrote:
Travis Oliphant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think definitely, his usage pattern represented a bad corner case.
An unusable corner case in fact. At any rate, moving to use the
system free and malloc fixed the immediate problem. I mainly wanted to
report the problem
Josiah Carlson wrote:
Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1] There *is* an array type for general PyObjects in scipy_core, but
that's not being used in the code that blows up and has nothing to do
with the problem Travis is talking about.
I seemed to have misunderstood the
Jim Jewett wrote:
Do you have the code that caused problems?
Yes. I was able to reproduce his trouble and was trying to debug it.
The things I would check first are
(1) Is he allocating (peak usage) a type (such as integers) that
never gets returned to the free pool, in case you need more
Hello,
I would appreciate feedback concerning these patches before the next
PythonD (for DOS/DJGPP) is released.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Ben Decker
Systems Integrator
http://www.caddit.net
-
Stay ahead of the information curve.
Receive MCAD
On 2005-11-16, Travis Oliphant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josiah Carlson wrote:
I seemed to have misunderstood the discussion. Was the original user
accessing and saving copies of many millions of these doubles?
He *was* accessing them (therefore generating a call to an array-scalar
object
On 17-nov-2005, at 3:15, Travis Oliphant wrote:
Jim Jewett wrote:
(2) Is he allocating new _types_, which I think don't get properly
collected.
Bingo. Yes, definitely allocating new _types_ (an awful lot of
them...)
--- that's what the array scalars are: new types created in C.
15 matches
Mail list logo
