Stefan Krah added the comment:
Richard Oudkerk <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote:
> PyObject_GetBuffer(b, &buf, PyBUF_WRITABLE);
> view = PyMemoryView_FromBuffer(&buf);
> // readinto view
> PyBuffer_Release(&buf);
>
> Would attempts to access a "leaked" reference to view now result in
> ValueError("operation forbidden on released memoryview object")? If so then
> I think this would be safe.
You would need to call memory_release(). Perhaps we can just expose it on the
C-API level as PyMemoryView_Release().
IMO the use of PyObject_GetBuffer() should be discouraged. The semantics
aren't clear (see #15821). I'd suggest using:
1) A buffer provider is involved (the case here):
PyMemoryView_From Object()
2) A piece of memory needs to be wrapped temporarily and no references
to the memoryview are "leaked" on the Python level:
PyMemoryView_FromMemory()
3) A piece of memory needs to be packaged as a memoryview with automatic
cleanup in mbuf_dealloc():
PyMemoryView_FromBufferWithCleanup() (proposed in msg169613)
So I think the combination of PyMemoryView_FromObject() with a call to
PyMemoryView_Release() should indeed work here.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15903>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
