Stefan Krah stefan-use...@bytereef.org added the comment:
A quick question: Prior to this patch test_memoryview.py exercised
both mbuf_clear() and memory_clear(). Now gcov shows no coverage.
Is this expected? Is it still possible to construct tests that
exercise the code?
--
Richard Oudkerk shibt...@gmail.com added the comment:
Is it possible that the use of test.support.gc_collect() in test_memoryview
made the difference?
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue14930
Stefan Krah stefan-use...@bytereef.org added the comment:
Sorry folks, I messed up the revisions when testing. This commit has
nothing to do with the decreased coverage.
Now I properly bisected and in r75481 mbuf_clear() and memory_clear()
are still covered, but in r75484 they are not.
r75484
Stefan Krah stefan-use...@bytereef.org added the comment:
r75484 should be b595e1ad5722.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue14930
___
Changes by Richard Oudkerk shibt...@gmail.com:
--
resolution: - fixed
stage: patch review - committed/rejected
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue14930
___
Richard Oudkerk shibt...@gmail.com added the comment:
New patch.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file25742/memoryview-weakref.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue14930
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
In the test, you should call gc.collect() so that it works on non-reference
counted implementations. Also, I would call PyObject_ClearWeakRefs() after
memory_release() and Py_CLEAR(self-mbuf), not before (in case a weakref
callback relies on
Richard Oudkerk shibt...@gmail.com added the comment:
In the test, you should call gc.collect() so that it works on non-
reference counted implementations.
I did think about using gc.collect(), but I was not sure whether it was
guaranteed to collect everything possible if you only call it
Charles-François Natali neolo...@free.fr added the comment:
I did think about using gc.collect(), but I was not sure whether it was
guaranteed to collect everything possible if you only call it only once.
(I know nothing about garbage collectors.)
You could use support.gc_collect() for
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Doing it after Py_CLEAR(self-mbuf) seems to contradict
http://docs.python.org/dev/extending/newtypes.html?highlight=pyobject_clearweakrefs#weak-reference-support
which says
The only further addition is that the destructor
Richard Oudkerk shibt...@gmail.com added the comment:
Updated patch.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file25744/memoryview-weakref.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue14930
Changes by Jesús Cea Avión j...@jcea.es:
--
nosy: +jcea
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue14930
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Updated patch.
Looks good to me!
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue14930
___
___
Roundup Robot devn...@psf.upfronthosting.co.za added the comment:
New changeset bc0281f85409 by Richard Oudkerk in branch 'default':
Issue #14930: Make memoryview objects weakrefable.
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/bc0281f85409
--
nosy: +python-dev
New submission from Richard Oudkerk shibt...@gmail.com:
The attached patch makes memoryview objects weakrefable.
The reason I would like them to be weakrefable is so that I can manage the
finalization and pickling of memoryview objects which wrap shared mmap segments.
(It would be even better
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Looks like an obviously good idea.
The patch needs tests, though.
--
nosy: +pitrou, skrah
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue14930
16 matches
Mail list logo
