I just noticed this response right as I sent my other message. For some reason my news reader didn't thread it, so it was all by itself... Please disregard the rant concerning creation of objects in C. :)
/me hugs Martin /me ducks and hides! On Fri, 2005-10-07 at 09:57 +0200, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > Jeremy Moles wrote: > > PyObject* obj = _PyObject_New(&PyType_MyType); > > obj = PyObject_Init(obj, &PyType_MyType); > > > > ... > > > > return obj; > > The call to PyObject_Init is redundant: _PyObject_New > is malloc+init. However, this shouldn't cause any crashes (except in the > debug build). PyObject_Init is documented as > > Initialize a newly-allocated object op with its type and initial > reference. Returns the initialized object. If type indicates that the > object participates in the cyclic garbage detector, it is added to the > detector's set of observed objects. Other fields of the object are not > affected. > > [I don't know where the mentioning of GC comes from - it appears to be > incorrect] > > > When "obj" gets back to the interpreter, Python sees it (or rather, it's > > __repr__) in accordance with what it "should" be. However, any attempt > > to USE the object results in a segfault. I feel my problem is simply > > that I'm not allocating "obj" correctly in the C++ function. > > It doesn't crash because of the allocation - this code is correct. > However, it is also incomplete: none of the state of the new object > gets initialized in the fragment you are showing. So it likely crashes > because the members of the object are stray pointers or some such, > and accessing them causes a crash. > > Regards, > Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
