On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:02 AM, Michael.Abshoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  > But, test test suite doesn't test for all of the odd input that users
>  > will feed to sage.  These are the cases that will leak memory and
>  > there is not possible way to test for all of them.  Also debugging
>  > memory leaks is super nasty.  Compared to that pain, having a slightly
>  > slower memory allocator is not a big deal.
>
>  Well, as long as you write code in C memory leaks when something goes
>  wrong is something you have to live with. And python is far from perfect
>  regarding memory management too IMHO as I point out above. Another issue
>  is that once we have extensions that do work with threads we no longer
>  can use Python's allocation since it isn't thread safe.
>
>  Adding some more checks to the Sage codebase around allocations is
>  something that ought to be done, but on the list of things to fix
>  potential memory leaks from garbage input is low on the list of my
>  personal priority as long as we have real leaks to deal with. Feel free
>  to try out the above and report back if it fixes issues and how much of
>  an impact on performance it has.
>

Just for the record, I think Brian isn't suggesting we do anything
differently with Sage.  He's writing lots of _new_ code using
Cython for his distributed matrix arrays project, and ran into this problem,
and thought -- surely the Sage folks have solved this.  Then he looked
at our code for "the solution" and noticed that we haven't.

That said, this is definitely not the most important thing for *us*
to worry about at this point.    We have many more important
problems to solve first.   But I'm really glad Brian is raising this
issue, etc.

 -- William

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to