On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:14 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: >> Furthermore, our server is fairly complex: we're using quite some >> libraries to do different jobs, and one of the approaches (not the >> only one) that we're taking to deal with this beast is to analyze its >> memory-related behaviour from an external POV (thinking it as a black >> box). >> >> So, beyond it's arguable utility, do you think that having that >> information could harm us in some way? > > I think implementing it might do harm. When a memory error is raised, > you are typically out of memory, so allocating more memory might fail > (it just did). Therefore, allocating more objects or doing string > formatting will likely fail (unless the requested size is much larger > than the memory required for these operations). > > So the chance increases that you trigger a fatal error.
What Martin describes here is a more explicit description of what I meant by "practical implementation problems" and "special cases when raising MemoryError". However, I think thresholding the additional error formatting to only kick in the requested amount of memory exceeds a certain size would be an adequate safeguard without reducing the utility in Facundo's use case (the pre-allocated instance can have a generic error message saying an allocation of less than the threshold value failed). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
