Meador Inge added the comment: On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Serhiy Storchaka <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote:
>> Serhiy, I didn't analyze it too in depth, but why aren't the test cases >> using the __sizeof__ support work you implemented for issue15467? I think >> these tests should be using the more exact method like your other >> '__sizeof__' patches. > > Because struct has not codes for Py_off_t and PyThread_type_lock. Of course it doesn't -- those are Python specific typedefs. 'PyThread_type_lock' is just a typedef to 'void *' and something could be figured out for 'Py_off_t' in the support code. Anyway, the way you are implementing the tests has the same issue as Martin pointed out for the 'object.__sizeof__' method in issue15402. I could replace the 'buffered_sizeof' implementation with: static PyObject * buffered_sizeof(buffered *self, void *unused) { Py_ssize_t res; res = 1; if (self->buffer) res += self->buffer_size; return PyLong_FromSsize_t(res); } and the tests will still pass. ---------- nosy: +loewis _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15487> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com