Alexander Belopolsky added the comment: The affected code is the only case I could find in stdlib where O& format was used to populate PyObject* variables. Although it appears to be valid usage, the code presents an exception to the following note at http://docs.python.org/dev/c-api/arg.html : "Note that any Python object references which are provided to the caller are borrowed references; do not decrement their reference count!"
Should we add that O& a possible exception to this rule? I'll propose a specific change if we agree in principle. I am not sure if O& documentation should make any recommendations to the writers of conversion functions. For example, O& convertors returning a borrowed reference may be discouraged in favor of O or O& variants or returning PyObject* from a convertor may be discouraged altogether. I am adding Georg who accepted my other documentation changes in this area to the "nosy" list. ---------- nosy: +georg.brandl __________________________________ Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue2222> __________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
