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" wr
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
de
Jeremy Moles wrote:
> [...] What I'm trying
> now is the following:
>
> PyObject* obj = _PyObject_New(&PyType_MyType);
> obj = PyObject_Init(obj, &PyType_MyType);
>
> ...
>
> return obj;
>
> When "obj" gets back to the interpreter, Python sees it (or rather, it's
>
Hey guys, sorry to ask another question of this nature, but I can't find
the answer or a single example of it anywhere. I'm sure it's been asked
before, but my google-fu isn't strong enough to find anything.
I have the following:
struct MyType {
PyObject_HEAD
I wrote:
[snip]
> What am I missing?
The fundamental problem is that this:
if (!(ro = PyObject_New(MyIter, &MyIterType)))
return NULL;
is really only a malloc() - it doesn't call the tp_new function at all.
This is not really clear in the 2.3 version of the C API document
myiter
e = myiter.MyIter()
str(e)
''
e.next()
0
e.next()
1
e.next()
2
e.next()
3
However, if I create the MyIter object from a C factory function:
static PyObject *
FromFile(PyObject *self, PyObject *args)
{
MyIter *ro;
if (!PyArg_ParseTuple(args, ""))
ret
