On 27 April 2016 at 17:14, Serhiy Storchaka <storch...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think that we can resolve this issue by following steps: > > 1. Add a new function PyModule_AddObject2(), that steals a reference even on > failure.
I'd suggest a variant on this that more closely matches the PyList_SetItem and PyTuple_SetItem cases: PyModule_SetAttrString The first two match the signature of PySequence_SetItem, but steal the reference instead of making a new one, and the same relationship would exist between PyObject_SetAttrString and the new PyModule_SetAttrString. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
