In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>The problem is not that difficult to find, but it was 2am in the morning and
>I was misled by the different behavior of pyFun1 and pyFun2.
Don't know if you were using Windows, but if you were then Python Memory
Validator would ha
Bo Peng wrote:
>> Sorry, are you saying that the code you posted does NOT have a memory
>> leak, but you want us to find the memory leak in your real code sight
>> unseen?
Problem found. It is hidden in a utility function that converts the
return value to a double. The refcnt of the middle res
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Sorry, are you saying that the code you posted does NOT have a memory
> leak, but you want us to find the memory leak in your real code sight
> unseen?
valgrind does not detect anything so it does not look like memory leak.
I just can not figure out why val[0], readonl
Bo Peng wrote:
> The real code is much more complicated and I can not possibly explain
> the details here. Can anyone *guess* what might go wrong?
Sorry, are you saying that the code you posted does NOT
have a memory leak, but you want us to find the memory
leak in your real code sight unseen?
Dear list,
I spent the last 12 hours in catching this bug (?) and what I found out
is very difficult to explain:
Basically, I need to call a user-provided function many times, with a
tuple as parameter.
C/C++ side: (class A, constructed using a python function m_func)
// create in the con
