#14711: Memleak when creating QuadraticField
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: jpflori | Owner:
Type: defect | davidloeffler
Priority: critical | Status: new
Component: number fields | Milestone: sage-5.12
Keywords: memleak, number field, | Resolution:
QuadraticField | Merged in:
Authors: | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: u/SimonKing/ticket/14711 | Commit:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by SimonKing):
Replying to [comment:46 nbruin]:
> Yes of course. `CDF.convert_map_from(Q)` should return a copy equivalent
to `phi` with strong references to domain and codomain. If the original
`phi` is a composition of "weak" (coercion generated) maps then all the
components of the returned `phi` should also be strengthened copies.
In other words, you do think that we should distinguish between underscore
methods that are used internally in the coercion system and just return
the maps, and an "official" interface that returns strong copies. Do I
understand correctly?
Concerning compositions, I agree that the parent in the middle should be
kept alive by the composed map (even if this map is in the coercion
system, hence, domain and codomain are only weakly referenced): If the
composed map is kept in memory, then we need to be able to apply the
composition, and hence the "man in the middle" needs to be available.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/14711#comment:52>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
