I was going to rebulid pythonocc 0.5 with OCE 0.6.0 to try to check if the
code I sent does still crash or not with 0.6.0, but it misses BinLPlugin. Do
I have to download the latest pythonocc version to build with OCE?
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Thomas Paviot <tpav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2011/9/30 D. Barbier <bou...@gmail.com>
>
>> On 2011/9/30 István Csanády wrote:
>> > Thanks Thomas, this solved the leaking issue. Any ideas for a workaround
>> for
>> > the MMGrOpt crash (when I don't remove gcurve.GetObject())? Or I will
>> have
>> > to wait for pyocc 0.6?
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Can you please check whether your crash happens with OCE 0.6.0? We
>> fixed a bug which looks similar, so maybe it is gone.
>> If it crashes, how can I reproduce it? I tried your
>> example_GC_istvan.py file with MMGT_OPT set to 0, but it does not
>> crash.
>>
>
> On OSX/pythonocc current master/OCE-0.6.0, crash with MMGT_OPT=0,
> MMGT_OPT=2 but succeed with MMGT_OPT=1.
>
>
>>
>> > Last night I have been profiling some pythonocc code and I have noticed
>> that
>> > collect_object is a quite slow even if I remove logging. Probably it has
>> > some potential to increase pythonocc's performance. Since it is always
>> > called when an object is destructed it makes sense to remove somehow the
>> > costly string compares for the Handle objects. For example if it is
>> possible
>> > in OCE in the Handle class generator (handle classes are generated
>> > automatically, aren't they?) can be modified that every Handle class
>> should
>> > subclass from an empty marker class (eg. class HandleMarkerClass{}) and
>> this
>> > can be used in the GC by checking only
>> > isinstance(obj_deleted,HandleMarkerClass), removing
>> > the obj_deleted.__class__.__name__.startswith('Handle').
>>
>> AFAICT all handles derive from either Handle_Standard_Transient or
>> Handle_Standard_Persistent, so your solution can be implemented
>> without changes in C++ code.
>>
>> > The hasattr calls
>> > might also can be replaced by some tricky way but I don't know if it
>> worth
>> > it but I think it does since hasattr searches in a python dictionary
>> which
>> > is a hashmap and a single isinstance is might be less costly than a dict
>> > lookup. But replacing somehow the string compare IMO would definitely
>> worth
>> > it.
>> > But these are only ideas I don't know OCC's structure very well.
>>
>> I guess that
>> hasattr(obj_deleted,"GetHandle")
>> can be replaced by
>> isinstance(deleted, OCC.Standard.Standard_Transient) or
>> isinstance(deleted, OCC.Standard.Standard_Persistent)
>>
>
> Absolutely. That's what I implemented in my previous attachment.
>
>
>>
>> Denis
>>
>
> Thomas
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pythonocc-users mailing list
> Pythonocc-users@gna.org
> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/pythonocc-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
Pythonocc-users mailing list
Pythonocc-users@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/pythonocc-users
